Climate change is a global problem—but as of yet, there’s no global solution. That’s why mayors across the U.S. are taking action, from building green to organizing bike rides, from redeveloping downtowns to cutting emissions. Here are just a few of the municipal leaders who have worked to take our collective future into their own hands.

Bloomberg unveils his grand Plan.PlanNYC 20301. Michael Bloomberg, New York City.
Pop.: 8.2 million
Call New York the accidental eco-city: cram millions of people onto an island, and you’ve got to figure out how to build up, not out. Throw a big park in the middle, and voila: you’ve got an anti-sprawl city that values open space. During his tenure, Bloomberg has made the most of that happy accident, creating an ambitious 127-point initiative called PlanNYC 2030 that encompasses everything from reclaiming waterfronts to repairing electrical grids to reducing traffic congestion. (OK, that last one hasn’t gone so well.) A year after unveiling the plan in 2007, the city had launched a full 93 percent of its components.

Nickels at a climate rally with King County exec Ron Sims, since tapped to head HUD.Oran Viriyincy 2. Greg Nickels, Seattle.
Pop.: 594,000
In some ways, Greg Nickels became synonymous with the phrase “green mayor” after spearheading the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement in 2005. Since then, more than 900 of Nickels’ fellow mayors have come on board, Republican and Democrat alike, from all 50 states. No stranger to eco-ideas at home, Nickels—who has led the Emerald City since 2002—has also been instrumental in bringing light rail to the area, pushing to increase investments in open space, and launching an ongoing series of “clean and green” community-service events. He’s up for reelection this year, and one challenger says he hasn’t done enough on the environment. Only in Seattle.

Newsom uses a white hanky to demonstrate clean diesel emissions. Seriously!MTC3. Gavin Newsom, San Francisco.
Pop.: 765,000
Another mack daddy of sustainability, Newsom is almost too green to believe. Since he took office in 2004, the city has reduced government emissions to below 1990 levels, launched the nation’s largest solar incentive program, banned plastic bags, and introduced ambitious green building and green jobs programs. Sometime in the not-too-distant future, city leaders hope to increase wind power by the Bay, including underwater turbines at the Golden Gate Bridge. Speaking at a conference of green IT entrepreneurs this spring, Newsom—who also recently confirmed his 2010 gubernatorial ambitions—offered up his city as guinea pig: “If you have an idea, let me know. We are a laboratory for innovation.”

Malloy in a glamorous mayoral moment.Will Merydith/flickr4. Ed Malloy, Fairfield, Iowa.
Pop.: 9,650
In November, the city fathers in this liberal southeastern Iowa outpost unanimously adopted a Green Strategic Plan. Their vote was more than ceremonial: they also secured a state-funded grant to hire a sustainability coordinator, inventory their greenhouse gases, and create educational materials for residents. The new plan envisions everything from conserving energy to supporting local farms. Malloy, who’s been mayor since 2001 and heads up a local oil company, says the environment-economy connection is clear. He hopes Fairfield’s ideas will catch on: “We want to create a model community, a virtual template that other small towns can adopt to create the same results.”

What a difference a Daley makes.www.drugabuse.gov5. Richard Daley, Chicago.
Pop.: 2.8 million
Since announcing his intention to make Chicago the country’s greenest metropolis, Daley has made great strides. Green roofs cover or are planned for 3 million square feet, topping everything from City Hall to a McDonald’s. Redevelopment and landscaping have revitalized gathering places across the city, from prominent landmarks like Grant Park to neighborhood playgrounds. And the Windy City is committed to increasing its use of renewable energy (though a recent revelation showed things lagging in that area). Chicago is even bidding to host the 2016 Olympics—a bid that hinges on the event being the greenest Olympics in history.

Franklin, my dear, she does give a damn.City of Atlanta6. Shirley Franklin, Atlanta.
Pop.: 519,000
Often held up as the poster child for sprawl, Atlanta boasts more green than meets the eye—and Franklin is to thank for much of the recent progress. Mayor since 2002, she has attacked infrastructure and intangibles with the same gusto, from overhauling the city’s sewer systems to creating a Climate Action Plan. The city is building a public-transit BeltLine, is tops in LEED-certified buildings, and has implemented practices in City Hall that led to a 20 percent decrease in energy usage. A comprehensive private-sector group called Sustainable Atlanta is developing recommendations for further actions, and all eyes are on the future. “We are building a green, sustainable city,” Franklin says. “We do this for our children, and we do this because it is the right thing to do.”

Planner, politico, father, grandfather.RalphBecker.com7. Ralph Becker, Salt Lake City.
Pop.: 179,000
Building on the groundbreaking work of predecessor (and official Grist crush) Rocky Anderson, Becker—who took office in 2008—has already made ripples in the eco-community. Upon taking the helm, Becker introduced his Blueprint for a Green City, in which he pledged to improve public transit, expand greenways, create neighborhood centers to promote walkability, and improve air and water quality. And the former urban planner isn’t just talking the talk; among other concrete steps, the city is piloting hybrid police cars and has undertaken an overhaul of its city code to make sustainability easier for all residents to achieve.

Don’t mess with Jerramiah.Byron Smith/Jersey Journal8. Jerramiah Healy, Jersey City.
Pop.: 242,000
He’s a rough and tumble guy running a historically rough and tumble city. But that just goes to show that green can be pursued anywhere, by anyone. Healy was recently given a Green Leadership Award by the state U.S. Green Building Council chapter. During his five-year tenure, he has held polluters accountable, opposed a controversial reservoir development scheme, and redeveloped brownfields. Up for reelection this month, Healy recently introduced ordinances that would require city departments to pursue LEED certification and green purchasing, and is reportedly considering a ban on plastic bags.

Manny being Manny.City of Miami9. Manuel Diaz, Miami.
Pop.: 410,000
Though some critics have dubbed him “Concrete Manny” due to his love of development, Diaz is paving the way for sustainability in Miami. An early signatory to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, he created Miami’s first sustainability department and a community-wide Green Commission. He has pushed green building, led an energy-retrofit of City Hall that included solar-panel installation, and is converting the city’s fleet to more efficient vehicles. Late last year Diaz launched Bike Miami Days, and this spring the city hosted a week of events leading up to Earth Hour. “We’re on the front line of global climate change here,” Diaz told Newsweek in 2007. “The water level doesn’t have to rise too much for us to be riding around Miami in canoes.”

Walker? I’d rather bike.Robert the Noid/flickr10. Elaine Walker, Bowling Green, Ky.
Pop.: 53,000
This TV producer-turned-politician has her hands full, from increasing affordable housing to contending with the crash of Big Auto, but green is on her radar screen. Transportation issues loom large in this western Kentucky city, and Walker has worked with local bike-advocacy groups (even creating a Mayor’s Bike Ride) and launched a Rethinking Transportation Choices task force. A signatory to the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, she is a proponent of green building and downtown redevelopment. “There’s too much of a perception that going green is a little bit out there and idealistic,” she has said. “It’s not idealistic—it’s vital.”

Cicilline envisions a model future.Cicilline.com11. David Cicilline, Providence, R.I.
Pop.: 175,000
In late March, this native son signed an order requiring all new municipal buildings to be LEED-certified, saying such a move would help create jobs and boost the economy. It was the first step in a 30-point plan called Operation Opportunity that seeks to help this mid-sized New England city rise from the doldrums; other steps include doubling the recycling rate, creating a green jobs training corps, and finalizing site plans for wind turbines. Cicilline, at the wheel since 2003, has also named walkability and sustainable leadership among his goals for the city.

Get your Phil.Tom Story/ASU12. Phil Gordon, Phoenix.
Pop.: 1.6 million
The long-time Phoenician made a splash in March when he unveiled a 17-point sustainability plan for the desert megalopolis he’s run since 2004. During his tenure, Gordon has already overseen eco-upgrades ranging from LED traffic lights to LNG buses, as well as bringing light rail to the city. The new plan aims to make Phoenix the first carbon-neutral city in America, through green job training, building retrofits, and a massive investment in solar energy. It’s making Phoenix hot in a whole new way.

Coleman (left) and Rybak do their thing.Lou Michaels13. Christopher Coleman, St. Paul.
Pop.: 274,000
14. R. T. Rybak, Minneapolis.
Pop.: 377,000
The Twin Cities are in the hands of two progressive mayors intent on doubling the metro region’s eco-efforts. Coleman and Rybak, elected in 2005 and 2001 respectively, have both made sustainability a priority—Minneapolis, for instance, doles out climate change grants to neighborhood organizations, while St. Paul created its own hybrid car-sharing program. Together, the two leaders have created an annual sustainability report and a green manufacturing initiative, and they’re bringing bike-sharing to town. It’s all part of an effort, they say, to make theirs the most livable cities in the country.

Dixson, far left, leads the groundbreaking of Greensburg’s first eco-home.Greensburg GreenTown15. Bob Dixson, Greensburg, Kansas.
Pop.: 850
Talk about inheriting someone else’s problem: Bob Dixson became mayor of Greensburg in 2008, exactly a year after it was devastated by a tornado. But Greensburg has rallied, and the former postmaster is now overseeing the town’s much publicized green rebuilding effort (which has also been documented for TV). Learning as he goes, Dixson has become an eco-evangelist of sorts, traveling the nation to talk up renewable energy, green building, community spirit, and the common sense behind green. “In rural America,” he told Smithsonian magazine earlier this year, “we were always taught that if you take care of the land, the land will care of you.”

Related Links:

Making buildings more efficient: It helps to understand human behavior

Why buying cheap energy certificates worsens climate change

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Big Auto cannot sue to keep Rhode Island from enforcing tighter vehicle emissions standards, a federal judge ruled Tuesday. U.S. District Judge Ernest Torres said, essentially, that pending cases were pointless and a waste of time, seeing as automakers have already lost similar battles in California and Vermont.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Three paint companies should not have to clean up lead contamination in Rhode Island homes, the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. The decision reverses a landmark 2006 ruling in which the state was victorious in alleging that Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc., and Millennium Holdings LLC created a public nuisance by manufacturing and selling lead-based paint, despite knowing it was unsafe. Lead paint was banned in the U.S. in 1978, but some 240,000 homes in Rhode Island still contain it. The court decided 4-0 that the companies should not be on the hook to spend an estimated $2.4 billion for cleanup, since they could not control how the paint was used. "However grave the problem of lead poisoning is in Rhode Island, public nuisance law simply does not provide a remedy for this harm," said the court opinion. The paint industry has been victorious in similar cases in at least four other states; similar lawsuits are pending in Ohio and California.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Related Links:

Washington Times: “Obama digs in on global warming”

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

If news of states suing the EPA merely whets your appetite for vehicle-emissions news, here's more: Firstly, a federal judge has ruled that a lawsuit from automakers seeking to prevent Rhode Island from regulating vehicle emissions can go forward. Rhode Island officials are left wondering how their situation is different from a very similar lawsuit in Vermont, which was rejected by a federal judge in September. Secondly, DaimlerChrysler paid a record $30 million fine last year for failing to meet the U.S. government's unambitious fuel-efficiency standards. Thirdly, three German cities, including the capital Berlin, have kickstarted a program aimed at prohibiting high-polluting vehicles from their city centers. And finally, Beijing has introduced cleaner fuel standards in a further attempt to clear its air before the August Olympics. And that's it -- until there's more.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Copenhagen climate summit (part 1): the expectations

Wash. Times: “China vows to dramatically slow emissions growth.”

It's a rare political event that can draw applause from both the White House and environmental groups, but Lincoln Chafee's victory in the Rhode Island Republican primary on Tuesday was just that.

Lincoln Chafee.

The Bush administration reasons that Chafee -- the most liberal Republican in the Senate, and frequently at odds with Bush on hot-button issues from Iraq to tax cuts -- is their only hope of keeping a GOP hold on his Senate seat, given the overwhelmingly Democratic leanings of Rhode Island's voter base.

Meanwhile, the Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters -- the only big national green groups that endorse political candidates -- are heralding the victory of a moderate who has helped block some of the Bush administration's worst environmental policies. "The environment is and must remain a bipartisan issue," says Cathy Duvall, Sierra Club's national political director. "And it's leaders like Chafee who keep it that way."

And yet Chafee is an anomaly among the 2006 Senate candidates being backed by the groups; in the rest of the cases, the enviros are rooting for Dems, who need to gain six seats to take back the majority in the Senate. (Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, who's running for reelection as an independent after losing the Democratic primary, is also getting enviro backing, but he doesn't threaten the chances of a Democratic majority.)

What makes this year's Senate races particularly dramatic from the green perspective is that some of the GOP's worst environmental offenders -- Conrad Burns in Montana, Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania, and Jim Talent in Missouri -- are up for reelection and embroiled in narrow races against newcomers with ambitious green platforms. Also running for reelection is one of the Senate's strongest environmental champions, Washington's junior senator Maria Cantwell (D), whose aggressive challenger is a former insurance executive getting big support from Big Oil.

One common thread connects all the races, says Duvall: "Voters and candidates alike are placing a huge emphasis on energy. High gas prices and escalating conflict in the Middle East have opened a Pandora's box of concerns around meeting energy needs safely, smartly, affordably." No wonder challengers are developing ambitious energy platforms, and incumbents backed by the fossil-fuel industry are nervous.

It would be hard not to look green next to the Big Sky State's three-term GOP senator, Conrad Burns -- unabashed climate skeptic, advocate of human pesticide testing, beneficiary of $551,586 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry over the course of his career, and one of the "Dirty Dozen" members of Congress that LCV is most anxious to unseat.

Conrad Burns.

But Burns' challenger, Jon Tester, president of the Montana Senate and longtime organic farmer, is a strong environmental candidate in his own right. "Jon understands and champions sustainability on many levels -- agriculture, energy, land use, and lifestyle," says Theresa Keaveny, executive director of Montana Conservation Voters. "We are very proud to support him."

As a state senator, Tester led the fight to pass a 2005 law requiring Montana to produce at least 15 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2015 -- a victory that has already accelerated the development of wind farms in the state. Tester has also pushed hard to protect organic farms from "genetic drift" -- contamination from neighboring genetically modified crops -- and in the process faced off against Monsanto, chemical companies, and big grain growers in the state legislature.

Jon Tester.

Keaveny praises Tester for being a "stalwart supporter of enhancing public-land access for fishing, hunting, and recreation, steadfastly opposing all attempts to place these areas on the auction block." Burns, she says, has expressed little opposition to the Bush administration's efforts to privatize public lands.

Burns has earned a lifetime environmental voting score of 4 percent from LCV. According to the group, he has consistently voted against increasing fuel-economy standards, repeatedly sought to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, and opposed numerous efforts to push the development of renewable energy. On the subject of global warming, the senator remarked in a recent Energy & Environment Daily interview, "[It] has been happening since the glaciers started to recede. You remember the ice age? It's been warming ever since, and there ain't anything we can do to stop it." As if that weren't enough, Burns was a leading recipient of campaign donations from disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

A recent USA Today/Gallup Poll of likely voters found the two candidates neck-and-neck -- Tester leading with 48 percent to Burns' 45 percent, a difference within the poll's margin of error.

Rick Santorum -- as zealous an opponent of environmental protections as he is a Bible-thumper -- is in serious danger of losing his Senate seat to state Treasurer Robert Casey Jr., in what could turn out to be one of the biggest upsets of this election season.

Rick Santorum.

Santorum -- also a "Dirty Dozen" honoree, with a lifetime score of 10 percent from LCV and a zero score from Republicans for Environmental Protection for his voting record in 2005 -- doesn't put much truck in building a sustainable future. "Nowhere in the Bible does it say that America will be here 100 years from now," he said at a 1994 political rally. This spring, Santorum pushed for the failed GOP energy package -- ridiculed even by right-wing ideologues -- that proposed a $100 gas rebate for drivers in exchange for opening the Arctic Refuge to drilling. And yet strong fuel-economy standards don't strike Santorum as a good way to save drivers money: He has opposed efforts to increase them no less than six times. He's also opposed efforts to promote the development of renewable energy and voted against the bipartisan 2005 Sense of the Senate resolution acknowledging that global warming is a human-made problem in need of federal action.

Says LCV's senior vice president for political affairs, Tony Massaro, "Virtually every chance he gets, Sen. Santorum has voted for oil and gas interests and against the environment."

Robert Casey Jr.

While Casey has not had the opportunity to build a comprehensive environmental record as state treasurer, his environmental platform has been heartily endorsed by both the Sierra Club and LCV. Both Duvall and Massaro say his green vision would merit their support even if he weren't running against a senator with an anti-environment streak. "Bob is very impressive," says Massaro. "We think he has really solid environmental positions and would vote with us on the major issues."

Casey has pledged support for an ambitious 40-mile-per-gallon fuel-economy standard, and says he would back a requirement that an increasing percentage of the U.S. electricity mix come from renewable sources. Santorum, for his part, voted against including such a requirement in the 2005 energy bill.

The two candidates also diverge sharply on the subject of controlling mercury emissions. This is a particularly controversial issue in Pennsylvania, home to numerous coal-fired power plants; virtually every lake, river, and stream in the state is under a fish-consumption advisory due to mercury contamination. While Santorum supported the Bush rollback of Clinton-era efforts to reduce mercury emissions, Casey supports an approach outlined by Gov. Ed Rendell (D) that would impose stricter limits on mercury emissions in Pennsylvania.

The latest USA Today shows Santorum trailing Casey by a whopping 18 percentage points among likely voters./Gallup poll

Maria Cantwell.

Enviros have been relieved in recent weeks to see outspoken Arctic Refuge defender Maria Cantwell leading in the polls over her opponent, Mike McGavick, a former executive at Safeco Insurance Co. and top aide to former Sen. Slade Gorton (R), whom Cantwell defeated six years ago.

The first candidate endorsed by LCV and Sierra Club this election season, Cantwell has an 86 percent lifetime voting score from LCV. "She's not just a reliable environmental vote, she's been an incredibly gutsy and tireless leader on a host of issues ranging from fuel-economy standards to Superfund to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge," says Duvall. This year, Cantwell spearheaded a Democratic energy plan that proposes cutting U.S. dependence on oil imports 40 percent by 2020, slashing oil and gas subsidies, and promoting infrastructure development for biofuels.

Mike McGavick.

While McGavick has little in the way of a public-sector environmental record, he already has a bad rep among enviros. As an insurance industry lobbyist, he tried to ensure that taxpayers rather than polluters would have to pay for Superfund cleanups, according to LCV's Massaro. This year, McGavick has gotten help from Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens (R) in raising money from the oil industry (Stevens harbors a nasty grudge against Cantwell for her successful efforts to prevent drilling in the Arctic Refuge). Duvall says McGavick "would be expected to heavily favor industry concerns over environmental protections if he won the Senate seat."

According to a Sept. 6 Rasmussen poll, Cantwell has a 17-point lead over McGavick, boasting 52 percent of the likely vote compared to his 35. That's a substantial jump for Cantwell since August, when she led by only six points.

Missouri is another state where a pro-environment Democratic newcomer stands a decent chance of knocking out a right-wing Republican incumbent.

Jim Talent.

Jim Talent -- yes, he's also a "Dirty Dozen" designee and a low-scorer in LCV's book at 15 percent -- has supported the Bush administration's efforts to weaken restrictions on toxic mercury emissions, despite widespread mercury contamination in his state's water bodies. Talent has also been a strong supporter of Bush's controversial Clear Skies program, criticized by enviros for weakening Clean Air Act protections, and an avid proponent of drilling in the Arctic Refuge. "With all due respect, I cannot understand what coherent political philosophy cuts its own country off from oil," he said at a press conference in April. "It is time to open up the Arctic.''

Claire McCaskill.

Though challenger Claire McCaskill hasn't established much of an environmental record as state auditor, she's earned endorsements from both the Sierra Club and LCV. She has stated that "global warming threatens our way of life" in Missouri, and has made energy independence a central pillar of her campaign. In her comprehensive energy platform, she calls for 10 percent of America's electricity to come from renewable sources by 2020. While there are some tenets of her energy plan that enviros might question, such as her call for further investment and research into coal liquefaction, Massaro is confident that McCaskill "would bring a dramatic improvement to Missouri's representation on environmental issues."

Recent polls show the two in a dead heat.

Related Links:

Approaching Copenhagen with a Portfolio of Domestic Commitments

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

The reelection campaign of Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee, widely considered one of the most vulnerable Republicans in Congress this year, has prompted a verbal blitzkrieg from progressive activists -- not aimed at the candidate, but at the Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters, two green groups that have endorsed him.

"This may very well be the most moronic move by any organization this election cycle," seethed Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (aka Kos), godfather of the influential liberal blog Daily Kos, in a post last week, referring to the Sierra Club's plans to stump for the moderate Republican. He followed it up with a post this week on the League's endorsement: "LCV joins the loser's circle."

Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope explained the group's move on his blog and on the blog The Huffington Post. "We need more Republicans like Sen. Chafee and we will continue to praise those who, like him, stand up for the environment," he wrote.

But, like Kos, Sierra Club members went into virtual revolt. "What idiocy! You should be ashamed," one commented on Pope's blog. "I've been a member of the Sierra Club for a decade but I will never give you money again," wrote another. Nor did Pope get much sympathy from commenters on Grist's own Gristmill, or on the progressive blog Firedoglake, where the Sierra Club was dubbed "Wanker of the Day."

Some of the critics contend that Chafee's environmental record doesn't warrant support from green groups. That argument got a boost yesterday when the senator cast a deciding committee vote in favor of confirming Bill Wehrum as assistant EPA administrator for air and radiation. The nomination of Wehrum -- a utility lobbyist before he came to EPA, where he's been an architect of Bush's Clear Skies legislation and controversial rules on mercury and new-source review -- will now go before the full Senate for a vote. Chafee has said in the past that he believes Congress should interfere with presidential nominations only in extraordinary circumstances, but many enviros would argue that selecting an industry lobbyist to determine air policy fits that bill.

Kos seized on the vote to support his contention that "even the most rational argument in favor of the LCV and Sierra Club endorsements didn't hold up to reality."

But even before the Wehrum vote, Kos accused the Sierra Club of overlooking Chafee's environmental record: "And how was [Chafee's] 20 percent rating?" he taunted. "That's all it takes to get an endorsement these days? Are you really that easy?"

It's true that the Sierra Club essentially gave Chafee a 20 percent rating in 2004 based on five particular votes deemed important that year, two of them on whether to cut off debate on judicial nominees the Sierra Club opposed. But this 2004 vote tally -- which the Sierra Club says was not a scorecard -- was a marked departure from Chafee's otherwise solid environmental record. He got a 90 percent voting score from LCV last year, and has a respectable lifetime voting score of 78 percent.

More importantly, Pope told Muckraker, "Chafee showed remarkable courage and leadership in recent years when he leveraged his position as a moderate Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to block repeated attacks on environmental protections" -- attacks spearheaded by the right-wing committee chair, James Inhofe (R-Okla.).

Chafee was, for example, the only Republican committee member to oppose the Bush administration's Clear Skies initiative, providing the instrumental vote that prevented the bill from going before the full Senate, where it was expected to pass. He has also played a key role in the fight to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from drilling. "He was an absolutely crucial vote on ANWR," said Pope. "Without him we would have lost the battle." And as chair of the Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water Subcommittee, Chafee has refused to take up a House-passed bill, sponsored by Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.), that would dramatically weaken the Endangered Species Act.

"The Clear Skies bill was Bush's top environmental and legislative priority, and Chafee stood his ground," said John Walke, director of the clean-air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, who has collaborated with Chafee's office on air-policy initiatives. "I can't overstate the kind of courage it took for Chafee to buck the president, buck the committee chairman, buck the party." Walke, like most green activists, could not comment further on the Chafee campaign because his group is constrained by its tax status from endorsing candidates.

The owner of two Toyota Priuses, one in Washington, D.C., and one in his home state, Chafee has consistently voted in favor of stronger fuel-economy standards for cars, ambitious targets for renewable-energy production, and mandatory greenhouse-gas regulations. Local enviros also applaud his success in securing federal funds for green initiatives in the state -- brownfields cleanup, water-quality improvements to Narragansett Bay, and expansion of Rhode Island's national wildlife refuges.

Both Steve Laffey, Chafee's opponent in the Republican primary, and Sheldon Whitehouse, the leading candidate in the Democratic primary, are outlining strong environmental platforms, but that's to be expected, given that Rhode Island voters are among the greenest in the nation.

"Linc Chafee has proven himself an environmental hero," Pope said, "and we are not going to dump our heroes overboard." (Pope could not be reached yesterday for comment on the Wehrum vote.)

Said Tony Massaro, LCV's senior vice president for political affairs, "Sen. Chafee is a top environmental leader in Congress, and very deserving of our support."

The most heated debate, though, is not over Chafee's environmental record, but over whether environmental groups should support any Republican at all. Many activists argue that they shouldn't: Given that Dems have a shot (albeit a very long one) at winning back the majority in both houses of Congress in November, and said majority would be the best means of reversing the current GOP-led assault on environmental protections, how can green leaders justify supporting Republican candidates who would impede that transfer of power?

Here's how Kos put it: "Um, guys over at the Sierra Club? Yeah, you, Carl Pope? How has Bill Frist and the Republican Congress been for your agenda? ... [G]ood luck seeing your agenda continue to be demolished by the GOP leadership Chafee will continue to enable."

But Pope rejects the argument that environmentalists must ally themselves with Democrats. "It is absolutely vital that environmentalism be nonpartisan," he said, adding that the focus should be on the long-term goal of breaking down partisan divides on green issues, not sharpening those divides today for near-term gains.

Unsurprisingly, Martha Marks, president of Republicans for Environmental Protection, agrees: "If the environmental community turns its back on Lincoln Chafee, who is one of the strongest environmental leaders of our day -- Democrat or Republican -- then it will have no credibility with any Republicans going forward." She argues that it would be a big mistake for green organizations to alienate moderate Republicans who are trying to steer their party back toward the conservation ethic espoused by leaders from Theodore Roosevelt to Richard Nixon to John Chafee, Lincoln's Senate predecessor and father. "The only time you make any long-term, permanent progress on anything in this country is when you have bipartisan support," she said.

Susan Gobreski, a field director at LCV, sounded a similar note, saying that "a partisan strategy gets you a win 50 percent of the time if you're lucky. Our responsibility is to think about leadership. What's needed if you care about an issue agenda is politicians who will fight to be the person who is doing the best job on an issue. If it's simply about parties, not people, individuals won't have any incentive to break out of the mold, rally support, and create cross-party consensus. Chafee represents the kind of person in both parties that we should all be looking to."

But even with enviros' backing, Chafee faces a brutal reelection campaign. Come November -- or even September, when Rhode Island holds its primary -- we'll find out whether green endorsements can help keep a moderate Republican afloat at a time when moderation has become political deadweight.

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Another coal plant bites the dust

R.I. jury finds paint companies liable for billions in lead cleanup

A six-person jury in Rhode Island made history yesterday when it found Sherwin Williams Co., Millennium Holdings, and NL Industries liable for lead paint contamination in hundreds of thousands of homes -- and on the hook for potentially billions of dollars to clean it up. It's the first-ever decision against paint companies in such a case, and may pave the way for similar rulings in lawsuits being brought by cities and counties in several other states. Paint makers have claimed for years that they aren't responsible for abating contamination from lead-based paints, which were outlawed in the U.S. in 1978 after studies showed that exposure to flakes and dust from the paint could cause brain damage in children. It's estimated that as much as a quarter of the nation's housing stock has contained lead paint, and that millions of children have been poisoned.

Related Links:

EU pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Louella Hill.

What work do you do? What's your job title?

I am the director of a program called Farm Fresh Rhode Island. For my work with Brown University Dining Services, I call myself the "Local Food Ambassador."

What does your organization do?

At Farm Fresh Rhode Island, we connect local eaters with local food producers. By encouraging a localized food system, we save thousands of "food miles." (The average item of food on the American dinner plate travels 1,600 miles between where it is grown and where it is eaten.) Buying local food preserves open space by keeping farms viable. Buying locally grown foods means eating fresher, more flavorful, more meaningful food.

What do you really do, on a day-to-day basis? What are you working on at the moment?

I encourage people at every link in the food chain (farmer, wholesaler, processor, buyer, restaurateur, chef, eater) to support local food producers. My days are filled with setting up farmers' markets, advising menu writers, building a web-based directory of local production, planning special events (Providence's Perfect Pickle Contest is coming up Oct. 3), taking people on farm tours, helping farmers unload their trucks, painting signs that say: "Buy Farm-Fresh Eggs," "Taste Sun-Ripened Peaches," and "Visit the Farm: Learn Where Your Food Comes From."

The farmer in the sell, the farmer in the sell.

Tomorrow is the opening day for the farmers' market I manage at Brown University. This morning I talked to a local bakery, asking them if they could make calzones with local vegetables; I talked to the police about parking; I called the goat-cheese lady. Then I attended a meeting about farm-to-cafeteria connections in Rhode Island; our goal is to get four Rhode Island public elementary schools to make at least one local food purchase this fall. I also need to mail Chef Snitzer at the Westin a list of area meat producers (lamb, beef, chicken, turkey, emu, venison, goat, pork).

What long and winding road led you to your current position?

I worked at a little restaurant named Café Roka in Bisbee, Ariz., throughout high school. It confirmed my love for food. In college, I was a server during a catered dinner. At the end of the night, while cleaning up, my supervisor asked me to throw out a sheet pan full of salmon fillets. There were 85 fat fillets and one big plastic-lined black hole. At that moment, I realized if I truly loved food, I had to know more about the systems that brought it to me. I had to work on this system so that less of it is wasted and more of it is appreciated. And at that moment, I was also fired.

Who's the biggest pain in the ass you have to deal with?

Whole Foods. I do give them credit for educating us about many important food topics (organic, GMOs, hormone-free). I also give them credit for creating a false sense of "moral eating."

My biggest gripe with Whole Foods -- at least the one here in Providence -- is that they do not carry Rhody Fresh Milk. Rhode Island has lost all but 16 of its dairy farms. As a last hope, five farmers last year formed a cooperative to market their milk under a Rhode Island label. The label has been wildly embraced by the general public. Unfortunately, these farmers cannot control their milk after it goes to the processor; their milk combines with milk from other local dairies (which may contain rBGH) in order to fill the silo. Because of the potential of rBGH, Whole Foods will not carry Rhody Fresh -- even though the first sign that greets customers when they enter the store reads "Local Foods."

Where were you born? Where do you live now?

I was born on Brewery Gulch in Bisbee, Ariz. I now live on the Westside of Providence, R.I.

What environmental offense has infuriated you the most?

Junk food in our schools. It makes me cry to think we feed the worst foods to the ones who need the best. It upsets me to no end to meet children who have never eaten a fresh vegetable in their entire life. It leads to adults who have no idea that food comes from the land and not the grocery store.

What are you reading these days?

I recently finished Ruth Reichl's two autobiographies -- Tender at the Bone and Comfort Me with Apples.

What's your favorite meal?

I love smoky corn tortillas with fresh eggs, avocados, fried greens, and olive oil.

Which stereotype about environmentalists most fits you?

I wear patchouli.

What's your favorite place or ecosystem?

Zacatecas Canyon in the Mule Mountains in southern Arizona (where I was born). I would take a mountain over the sea any day.

What's your favorite band?

My favorite music includes the Be Good Tanyas, Gillian Welch, Cat Stevens, Bob Dylan, Emmylou Harris, Linda Ronstadt, The Jerimoth String Band, and anyone playing at the farmers' market.

What are you happy about right now?

I am happy about the 35 pounds of unsprayed, local blueberries we (my partner and I) picked and froze for the winter. I am happy because a manager from Parkside Restaurant in Providence walked up to a farmer at Monday's market and told the farmer he could drop off what he had left over after each market and Parkside would buy it. I am happy because my sister is going to have a baby in March.

If you could have every InterActivist reader do one thing, what would it be?

The next time you are at a restaurant, ask the waiter, the chef, the owner if anything on the menu is coming from a local farm. If yes, thank them. If no, ask why not.

Near Ye, Near Ye!

Louella Hill, Farm Fresh Rhode Island.

Do you have any plans to extend your work to other communities throughout the country? What about producing literature or training for other groups to use as a model for their work?    -- Jessica Van Houten, New York, N.Y.

I am one of many food fighters. In New England, for example, you'll find: Cindy and Sara at Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership, Kelly Erwin working with the Massachusetts Department of Agriculture on Farm to Cafeteria, Danielle Mullen at Berkshire Grown, Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture in western Massachusetts, the Vermont Fresh Network, Martha Putnum with Farm Fresh Connection in Maine, and more.

Networks are forming between grassroots organizations such as Local Harvest, the Farm-to-Cafeteria Listserv, and Buy Local! Buy Fresh! campaigns sponsored by the Kellogg Foundation. Through these networks, I am interested in circulating materials or running trainings to help more communities grow more local.

Though, to be honest, I really would like to have a herd of sheep. I would like to be Rhode Island's first commercial producer of sheep cheese and yogurt. Who knows my next step!

Do you have any advice for persuading a college to use local products in the cafeterias? Do you have any resources for locating farmers in Connecticut?    -- Timothy Hinkle, Summit, N.J.

Start by telling everyone you can about your idea to bring more locally grown foods to campus. Find allies in the agricultural community, in the kitchen, within the school administration. Gather parents and picky eaters, activists, your roommates, rotten tomatoes. To locate farmers in Connecticut, start with the Connecticut Department of Agriculture. You should also check out the Connecticut Farmland Trust; they do great work.

You mentioned that one of the things that burns you up is the junk food available in schools now. Does your organization have any thoughts about moving this local-food effort into the public schools?    -- Marc Chapman, Wahkon, Minn.

Getting fresh, locally grown foods into public schools is a thought always present in my mind. Unfortunately, at the moment we are almost overwhelmed by our website, working with Brown University Dining Services, doing outreach to local farmers, connecting with restaurants, fund-raising, etc. Most of this work is easy in that private schools and restaurant chefs really want to buy local and they have more money to do so.

The harder work is ahead: figuring out how to move local food into public schools. I am on an Urban Agriculture Policy Task Force that is trying to figure out a way to give schools a financial incentive to purchase locally. In addition to the economic barrier, most schools are contracted to Sodexho or Aramark. This gives the school very little power to decide where food comes from.

You provide a wonderful service for local producers, local consumers, and the planet. Does the local government or do local producers (or someone else) pay you? It would be super if all communities had a person like you.    -- Edelweiss D'Andrea, Ottawa, Ontario

Thanks. It is true; we need more local-food ambassadors. The number of salespeople from Kraft, General Mills, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Tyson, etc., who walk through the doors of school food-service offices is staggering. Every farming community needs someone to speak on their behalf.

I am paid part-time by Brown Dining Services and part-time by a grant from the Rhode Island Foundation. I am very fortunate.

I live in a farming community and support whole-heartedly the reasons one should buy local. But "local" here does not mean organic. Why shouldn't I buy the trucked-in-from-California organic produce in my grocery store rather than overload my son's system with pesticides?    -- Melissa Pierson, Kingston, N.Y.

I love this debate -- mainly because I get torn up about it myself. The bottom line is the only true organic is locally grown. You are kidding yourself to think that Earthbound Farm carrots are not pumping thousands of pounds of carbon and particulate matter into the atmosphere to be transported to New York -- as well as concentrating authority over our food production into the hands of a few large agribusinesses.

With every farm that sells out in Rhode Island, I think: one less chance to look a human in the eyes and ask, "Is this carrot grown in a way that is safe for future generations?"

I have to drive about 20 miles to get to a farmers' market. Do you think that the benefit of buying local offsets the imbalance that I cause by driving (emissions, gas, etc.)?    -- Ritesh M., St. Louis, Mo.

I vote for driving the 20 miles, shaking hands with the woman or man who grew your food, and then heading home with a car full of produce (which you can freeze or can).

I live in an agricultural area of northern Oregon, where it is easy to eat well locally in the summer. During the winter, however, it becomes more difficult to find sources of local foods. How do we best balance nutrition and bioregionalism?    -- Jaimes Valdez, Hood River, Ore.

Adjust your diet to the season: Pickle! Freeze! Can those summer treasures! Enjoy that winter squash in winter. Crave the first crop of spring lettuce. There is nothing more beautiful to me than watching the seasons turn by watching my dinner plate change. My body agrees.

Other than freezing in-season, local produce, what other suggestions do you have for helping consumers obtain fresh, healthy produce when they are not locally in season?    -- Todd Snider, Ellensburg, Wash.

Extend the growing season yourself with cold frames, greenhouses, root cellars, and grow lights. Why not turn that head of cabbage into some sauerkraut? Explore the vast varieties of sea vegetables in winter (dried makes them easy to ship). How about a food dehydrator? Last summer's nectarines never tasted so good. And what about sunflower, wheat berry, broccoli sprouts? Homegrown mushrooms?

In the winter months in Providence, a group I belong to called Urban Greens purchases bulk organic citrus and greens from the South. This is a great boost to get me through to spring.

What about places like Las Vegas where there is not much local production to speak of? What sort of agenda would you advocate to us?    -- Nate Enos, Las Vegas, Nev.

Nevada. Eek. As a native Arizonan, I wonder whether we (those of us who shop at grocery stores) belong in the desert at all. Metropolises like Phoenix scare me.

Find an organization such as Native Seed Search, which is helping to preserve and regain an understanding of how people once survived (and maybe how one day they will again) in the arid regions of the U.S. I see cactus, corn, and reptile meat in your future.

What writers are doing the best job of spreading the word about the importance of buying food from local sources?    -- Ken Peterson, Monterey, Calif.

There are such good writers out there: Michael Pollan (for The New York Times Magazine), Barbara Kingsolver, Andy Martin, Kamyar Enshayan, Wes Jackson, and Alice Waters, to name a few.

What can be done to encourage people to not depend on convenience so much and get companies to stop overpackaging and/or providing such small quantities?    -- Jenny Neat, Chaptico, Md.

Put farm-fresh food directly into people's mouths. Tasting is understanding.

How is your web-based food production directory organized? I am working on a similar project on the Big Island of Hawaii.    -- Tere Moody, Kamuela, Hawaii

We are cataloging every farmer and food producer in the region, their contact information, and what they grow; every farmers' market and who sells at it; every restaurant buying from a local farmer; and every farmer selling to a local institution. It is a lot of work. Luckily, Rhode Island isn't too big.

How do you reconcile the trade-off between environmental stewardship in the U.S. and economic development in poor countries that depend on agricultural exports for a sizable portion of their income?    -- Marshall Burke, Palo Alto, Calif.

The shift toward a more localized food economy in the U.S. is happening gradually. The pace of this change will allow time for the economies of poor, food-exporting countries to respond. One of the most helpful things the U.S. government could do is to stop "dumping" surplus grains into third-world economies at below-market price. This makes these countries less food secure than ever.

I would much like to know the source of your statement, "The average item of food on the American dinner plate travels 1,600 miles between where it is grown and where it is eaten."    -- Howard Wilshire, Sebastopol, Calif.

This fact comes from a white paper by Richard Pirog at Iowa State. He is doing incredible work.

We've launched a farm-to-school program in our community -- Food For Thought -- that, while embraced by the community, still suffers from sabotaging food-service staff. How do we overcome the bureaucracies, the lack of financial support, the apathy, and the lack of awareness among parents and school administrators to get farm-to-school programs going in every school?    -- Marty Fujita, Ojai, Calif.

Focus on the positive. Change is slow. But change is happening.

Do you think deliberately purchasing local food is a political act? What kind of statement does it make?    -- Leah Sprain, Seattle, Wash.

Food is the most powerful medium of social change.

Related Links:

A video interview with Bill Moyers

The Yes Men reveal their next big stunt

A video interview with the Yes Men

In the spring of 2000, in Manchester, N.H., a two-year-old Sudanese girl named Sunday Abek, just three weeks removed from an Egyptian refugee camp, was treated at an emergency room for a low-grade fever and vomiting. A throat culture turned up positive for strep, and she was sent home with an antibiotic prescription. Three weeks later, as her vomiting worsened, Abek was admitted to the hospital; there, she fell into a sudden coma. By the time her doctors properly diagnosed her, it was too late. Cause of death: acute lead poisoning.

Lead astray.

Photo: U.S. EPA.

In one sense, the shock that attends this story is testament to a remarkable environmental health achievement: There has been only one other documented case of fatal childhood lead poisoning in the U.S. since a 1978 ban on the residential use of leaded paint. In the 1950s and 1960s, by contrast, acute lead poisoning was a fairly routine cause of pediatric hospital admissions; during a three-year period in the 1950s, for example, there were 94 fatal cases in New York City, Cincinnati, St. Louis, and Baltimore alone.

But in another sense, the Sunday Abek tragedy highlights the limitations of our current approach to lead-poisoning prevention. The source of Abek's fatal dose was not the Egyptian refugee camp that her family had just left, but the New Hampshire apartment where they sought sanctuary. Abek's favorite play spots were the porch and the area around the living room windows. That porch, it turns out, was a mess of peeling, flaking, leaded paint -- 35 percent pure lead, more than 500 times the safe level -- and that window well contained more than eight times the safe amount of lead-contaminated dust.

Those conditions -- deteriorated leaded paint and elevated levels of lead-contaminated house dust -- are found in 4.4 million U.S. homes with young children. As a result, there are almost half a million lead-poisoned children in the U.S. In the Northeast's urban core, where a high percentage of housing was built when the concentration of lead in paint was at its peak (before 1950), the problem is especially dramatic. At its worst, it is an epidemic: In Providence, R.I., 20 percent of children who entered kindergarten in 2003 had been lead-poisoned.

Wrap your head around that number: 20 percent ... one in five ... six kindergartners in a class of 30. To be sure, these kids are not at risk of death (Abek's blood lead level was a stratospheric 30 times higher than that of most of the kindergartners), but the dangers of lower-level, clinically asymptomatic lead poisoning can be crushing and lifelong: diminished learning capacity, radical behavioral changes (attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity, for instance), and, ultimately, limited job prospects.

Who is responsible for the harm caused these children? And why, more than 25 years after the leaded paint ban, are children still exposed to dangerous levels of leaded paint and lead-contaminated dust? Why has the task of preventing a disease that is invariably referred to as "entirely preventable" proved so maddening?

A 1920s lead-paint ad targeted at paint dealers.

Photo: Cincinnati Children's Hospital.

The first documented case of childhood lead poisoning in the U.S. was in 1914. By 1930, leaded paint was regulated or banned in most European countries. Alas, in the U.S., it was a different story altogether. As detailed by public-health professors Gerald Markowitz and David Rosner in their book Deceit and Denial, the U.S. lead industry's response to the growing evidence of the harmful effects of leaded paint was to launch a massive, multi-decade advertising campaign in popular magazines -- much of it in the form of pictures and rhymes targeted directly at children -- that emphasized the beauty, safety, and durability of lead paint for interior use in nurseries, schools, and hospitals. After 1950, the industry consistently fought potentially hard-hitting federal and local regulation of its products.

Malevolent behavior, to be sure, but at least as much to blame for children's exposure today is policy makers' failure to heed the lesson of the 1978 leaded paint ban: lead poisoning is fundamentally an environmental, not a medical, problem. In pursuing a strategy that focuses on diagnosing poisoned children (the effect) rather than identifying toxic houses (the cause), we have guaranteed that children will continue to be poisoned for years to come. We must break this cycle by directing resources toward identifying toxic houses before they poison children

Time to get the lead out.

Photo: U.S. EPA.

And when we identify these houses, we must require a permanent remedy: the complete removal of all leaded paint. The primary reason that regulatory authorities condone less strict remedies is cost: The price of permanent abatement ranges from $5,000 to $10,000 per housing unit. But any halfway, so-called "lead-safe" standard that requires only the "cleaning and covering" of leaded surfaces will, in the long term, be neither safe nor cost-effective. As Dr. John F. Rosen, founder of the Children's Hospital at Montefiore's Safe House for Lead Poisoning Prevention, and his colleague Paul Mushak wrote in 2001, "Lead-painted surfaces in good condition rarely remain so. What was once intact lead-based paint is the source of all lead-bearing dust and paint chips. Therefore, it is the presence of lead paint on surfaces that defines the hazard, not the condition of surfaces containing lead paint."

But where, in these times of federal and state belt-tightening, will the funding come from for this massive environmental clean-up? If the state of Rhode Island has its way, the former manufacturers of leaded paint, which for years profited from a reckless disregard for children's health, will foot the bill. This April, the state will retry its first-in-the-nation public-nuisance lawsuit against the manufacturers (the first trial ended in a hung jury in 2002). Should Rhode Island emerge victorious, other states will surely get in line for a slice of a very large pie. And perhaps Sunday Abek will not have died in vain.

-- The editors

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

Residents of New York, rejoice: Your city might be noisy, crowded, and crass, but it's also the most compact megalopolis in the U.S. That's right -- the Big Apple ranked number one on Smart Growth America's recently released list comparing urban sprawl in major metropolitan areas. Other cities that did well include, in order, Jersey City, N.J. (who knew?), Providence, R.I., San Francisco, Calif., Honolulu, Hawaii, Omaha, Neb., Boston, Mass, Portland, Ore., Miami, Fla., and New Orleans, La.; the worst offenders, by contrast, included Riverside-San Bernardino, Calif., Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, N.C., Raleigh-Durham, N.C., and a host of other strung-out, hyphenated towns. The Smart Growth America report was the culmination of three years' work studying residential density, integration of homes, jobs, and services, strength of downtown areas, and interconnection of streets. Aside from eating up land, urban sprawl is associated with severe air pollution and related health problems, increased automobiles use, and high rates of traffic accidents.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives have accused the Bush administration of stacking a government advisory panel on childhood lead poisoning with members sympathetic to lead-related industries. The 12-member panel advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on averting such poisoning, and in the past, the CDC has appointed the panel's members. Now, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, who has been heavily involved in reshaping scientific advisory boards since the Bush administration took office, will replace three of the panel's members. The move comes at a time when the panel is about to consider whether to tighten safety standards for lead-levels in children, and when a Rhode Island court is hearing a potentially precedent-setting case in which the state has sued the makers of lead paint for creating a public nuisance.

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Rhode Island has taken eight paint manufacturers to court in a first-ever attempt by a state to hold companies accountable for decades of child lead poisoning. Rhode Island, which has one of the highest rates of such poisoning in the country, is claiming the manufacturers created a public nuisance by selling the paint. The paint companies counter that problems stem from improper maintenance, and that landlords, not manufacturers, should be held liable. Other states are following the dispute closely and are poised to initiate similar lawsuits if Rhode Island is successful. Lead paint was banned nationwide in 1978, when it was shown to cause health problems in children, such as learning disabilities, neurological damage, and even death. Last year, 8.1 percent of Rhode Island children under the age of six had elevated lead levels.

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

For marine life, Mt. Hope Bay might be the most inappropriately named place on Earth. In the 13-square-mile stretch of water straddling Rhode Island and Massachusetts, 15 fish species have all but disappeared over the last decade, leading some fishers to describe the area as a dead zone. Some scientists blame the deaths on Brayton Point, New England's largest fossil fuel plant, which uses nearly 1 billion gallons of bay water in its cooling system every day and pumps much of it back in, at temperature up to 95 degrees Fahrenheit. As a result some parts of the bay have heated up by as many as five degrees. Brayton Point owner PG&E denies responsibility, but after the plant increased its water use by 45 percent in 1985, the fish population in the bay dropped by 86 percent. The U.S. EPA is amassing evidence in the case against PG&E, but in the meantime, the plant continues to operate.

Related Links:

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

Growing up green: Breathing for two

Lawsuit accuses Virginia power company of poisoning Dominican community with toxic coal ash

A Superior Court judge in Rhode Island paved the way for a landmark lawsuit earlier this week when he gave state Attorney Gen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D) permission to sue manufacturers of lead-based paint. The paint industry had attempted to derail the trial by calling for every one of an estimated 300,000 owners of lead-painted homes to be codefendants. In a triumph that was hailed by anti-lead activists around the country, the judge disagreed, and Whitehouse is expected to go to court within six months. Paint companies maintain that they will win the case by showing that childhood lead poisoning is caused not by paint itself but by poor maintenance. Whitehouse responds that if the companies knew that deteriorating pain was a problem, consumers should have been warned. Rhode Island was the first state to sue paint companies for their role in lead poisoning, which causes neurological problems and learning disorders in children.

Related Links:

BPA Babies and Cash Registers

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen