<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>Nathanael Greene's Blog: Reviving the World's Oceans</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2008:/blogs/ngreene//28</id>
   <updated>2008-05-05T17:30:02Z</updated>
   
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Enterprise 1.52</generator>

<entry>
   <title>Cape Wind is needed now; MMS should move quickly</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/cape_wind_is_needed_now_mms_sh.html" />
   <id>tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2008:/blogs/ngreene//28.1172</id>
   
   <published>2008-04-21T20:43:43Z</published>
   <updated>2008-05-05T17:30:02Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Today we pressed send on our written comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed Cape Wind offshore wind project.The DEIS was prepared by the Mineral Management Service as part of the permitting process for the project....</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Nathanael Greene</name>
      
   </author>
         <category term="Reviving the World&apos;s Oceans" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Solving Global Warming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="366" label="capewind" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="193" label="markettransformation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="2044" label="MMS" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="117" label="offshorewind" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="50" label="renewables" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="249" label="wind" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Today we pressed send on <a href="http://docs.nrdc.org/air/air_08042101A.pdf">our written comments</a> on the <a href="http://www.mms.gov/offshore/AlternativeEnergy/CapeWind.htm">Draft Environmental Impact Statement</a> (DEIS) for the proposed <a href="http://www.capewind.org">Cape Wind</a> offshore wind project.The DEIS was prepared by the Mineral Management Service as part of the permitting process for the project. Based on our review of this the information in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers DEIS and other analyses that have been done on the project, NRDC has concluded that the project&rsquo;s environmental benefits will far outweigh its impacts.  </p><p>While NRDC has long been a strong supporter of increased use of wind energy, we have moved cautiously when it came to the Cape Wind project. This has been out of respect for the environmental review process&mdash;a corner stone of modern environmental policy&mdash;and wanting to make sure that the first offshore wind project in the US gets it right. The results of the DEIS and the other studies we have reviewed make it clear to us that the Cape Wind project will be a big win for the environment and is urgently needed. However, no energy project is without its potential environmental impacts and, to address these, NRDC strongly recommends that the Final Environmental Impact Statement (&ldquo;FEIS&rdquo;) and any lease, easement, and right-of-way for the Project include specific monitoring and mitigation conditions to protect the coastal and marine environments.  </p><p>The technology for producing electricity from wind energy has improved greatly over the past twenty years, and wind&mdash;on and offshore&mdash;now represents one of the most promising sources of emissions free electricity. Indeed, offshore wind power is probably the New England&rsquo;s largest untapped renewable energy resource and a vital resource for the entire country. </p><p>The potential benefits of the project are undeniable. The project would produce a maximum electric output of 468 MW and an average daily output of 182.6 MW free of air and water pollution. In addition to the local and regional air pollutants, such as NOx and SOx that the project would avoid, the project would reduce emissions of carbon dioxide&mdash;the pollutant most responsible for global warming by 0.88 million tons per year. As <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy_basics/CapeWind-index.html">UCS calculated as part of their comments</a>, this means that Cape Wind will reduce expected growth in CO2 emissions from the power sector in 2014 by about 9%. </p><p>This would be an important contribution to fighting global warming for two reasons: 1) it would do more than any other renewable energy source of electricity in New England to avoid global warming pollution and 2) it is by far the largest single contribution that Cape and Islands&mdash;a region that is exceptionally vulnerable to global warming&mdash;can make to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. </p><p>To address the environmental impacts of the project, NRDC recommends that the FEIS and lease, right-of way or easement for the project include the following: 1) a requirement for a comprehensive underwater acoustic monitoring system that not only measures the levels of underwater noise but that detects the approach of marine species into the safety zone around the turbines, 2) a requirement that construction activity be scheduled so as to avoid periods of peak abundance of threatened or endangered species, 3) a requirement that additional surveys be conducted to reduce remaining uncertainty regarding the threat of impacts to the federally endangered Roseate Tern, and 4) a requirement&mdash;detailed below&mdash;for a comprehensive Environmental Management, or adaptive management, system. </p><p>Given the relative lack of experience with offshore wind projects in this country, there is the possibility that the scale of certain impacts will only become clear overtime. It is important to the future not only of this project but to offshore wind generally, that there be an effective system be in place to monitor and adjust operations to avoid such impacts.  </p><p>To that end, we call on MMS to include in the FEIS and as a condition of any lease, easement or right-of-way, a detailed and comprehensive Environmental Management System for monitoring and mitigating potential impacts associated with project construction and operation. MMS&rsquo;s interim policies and Best Management Practices, issued as part of its Alternative Energy and Alternate Use (AEAU) Program, require MMS and lessees and grantees to adopt adaptive management<strong> </strong>that will include monitoring of activities to ensure that potential adverse impacts of OCS alternative energy development are avoided (if possible), minimized, or mitigated.  </p><p>The Environmental Management System should achieve the following goals:  </p><ul> <li>&middot; be guided by a panel of government and academic scientists, </li> <li>&middot; include specific adaptive responses for environment impacts judged to be reasonable possibilities at the chosen site,</li> <li>&middot; include a framework that prevents abuse of the program and which also protects the economic interest of Cape Wind by establishing a reasonable budget for implementation costs and mitigation measures including possible short-term shutdowns,</li> <li>&middot; require monitoring during both construction and operation, and</li> <li>&middot; require that all data collected be made available to the public, in electronic form, in real-time when possible.</li></ul> <p>The urgency of stopping global warming increases regularly as <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dlashof/danger_zone.html">the drumbeat of scientific studies</a> about the quickening pace of climate change continues. Cape Wind will make an important contribution to the fight against global warming both through its immediate displacement of fossil fuels and by paving the way for greater use of offshore wind.  </p><p>MMS should adopt our recommendations, finalize the EIS, and expeditiously permit the project with the recommended monitoring and mitigation measures.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>
<entry>
   <title>Hypoxia and the corn surge</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/hypoxia_and_the_corn_surge.html" />
   <id>tag:switchboard.nrdc.org,2007:/blogs/ngreene//28.416</id>
   
   <published>2007-07-28T04:48:21Z</published>
   <updated>2007-09-09T20:10:55Z</updated>
   
   <summary><![CDATA[Earlier this week, Bloomberg News carried an article titled: As ethanol demand grows, so does &quot;Dead Zone&quot; in Gulf of Mexico. A few things are not in dispute here, the hypoxic zone in the Gulf is growing and corn cultivation...]]></summary>
   <author>
      <name>Nathanael Greene</name>
      
   </author>
         <category term="Moving Beyond Oil" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Reviving the World&apos;s Oceans" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
         <category term="Solving Global Warming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   <category term="330" label="corn" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="328" label="deadzone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="39" label="ethanol" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="329" label="gulfofmexico" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="327" label="hypoxiczone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="331" label="nitrogen" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   <category term="212" label="waterpollution" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Earlier this week, Bloomberg News carried an <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/22/bloomberg/bxdead.php">article</a> titled: As ethanol demand grows, so does &quot;Dead Zone&quot; in Gulf of Mexico. A few things are not in dispute here, the hypoxic zone in the Gulf is growing and corn cultivation contributes to the hypoxic zone both because significant amounts of nitrogen are used in growing an acre of corn and because we grow more acres of corn than any other crop. Also, ethanol demand has probably caused&nbsp;a modest increase in corn production in years past and is causing a significant increase in corn acres this year (i.e. ~15%). The problem with the title and the article is they fail to acknowledge that nitrogen takes a while to move through a watershed.</p> <p>Our legislative director, <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/media/expertBio/w.asp">Karen Wayland</a>, got her PhD working on ag and watershed issues and she informs me that travel times for chemicals can reach into decades from some parts of even small watersheds. So the current corn surge and ethanol demand probably isn&#39;t causing the current growth in the hypoxic zone--that growth is caused by ag practices from previous years and decades.</p> <p>While the connection to ethanol is misleading, the bottom line is actually scarier. If there is a lag time between our ag practices and their impact on the hypoxic zone, then the corn surge isn&#39;t causing the current growth in the hypoxic zone, but it will condemn&nbsp;us&nbsp;to future growth.&nbsp;However, I just did a quick look at corn production and total nitrogen flux and yield to the Gulf and can&#39;t say I saw any obvious connection between the data at all. </p> <p>USGS updated it&#39;s <a href="http://toxics.usgs.gov/hypoxia/mississippi/nutrient_flux_yield_est.html">web page</a> on hypoxia and nutrient flows this week too, so I plan to spend some time looking into the data.</p> <p>The article notes:</p> <blockquote>A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency task force of scientists, state agencies and federal agencies set a goal in 2001 of reducing the Dead Zone to 2,000 square miles. Little has been done with the group&#39;s recommendations, [Matt] Rota [from the <a href="http://www.healthygulf.org/">Gulf Restoration Network</a>] said. Steps should include giving farmers more incentives to cut fertilizer runoff and reducing pollution from wastewater treatment plants, he said.</blockquote> <p>I&#39;d also point folks to an earlier post in which I wrote about some <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/with_biofuels_speed_kills.html">great recommendations for the Farm Bill from WRI</a>, many of&nbsp;which would help reduce nutrient runoff.</p>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>
