• Air Pollution Raises Cancer Risk
  
• More Carbon Dioxide Could Reduce Crop Value
  
• EPA Passes on Chemical Security Responsibility
  
• Wastewater Treatment Security Bill Introduced
  
• Chemical Plants Fined for Air Pollution
  
• Missouri River Conservationists Consider Legal Remedies
  
• Grants Support Wildlife Habitat Purchases
  
• Washington Pulp Mill Fined for Toxic Releases
  
• Biodiversity Hotspots Detailed in New Website
  

Air Pollution Raises Cancer Risk

Outdoor air pollution is almost 500 times greater than the health protective standard established in the Clean Air Act, according to an analysis of EPA air toxics data released today by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG). About 89 percent of this added cancer risk is from the soot released by diesel powered trucks, buses, and construction and farm equipment, the report shows.

"Dangers of Diesel: How Diesel Soot and Other Air Toxics Increase Americans' Risk of Cancer" comes as the Bush administration decides whether to issue new standards for diesel construction and farm equipment and their fuel.

"This is an unacceptable cancer threat to Americans, but it's one that we can virtually eliminate," said U.S. PIRG clean air advocate Emily Figdor. "Step one is for the Bush administration to continue to implement the tough clean air standards on the books for diesel trucks and buses and their fuel. Step two is for the administration to adopt strong new standards for the diesel engines and fuel that power construction and farm equipment."

U.S. PIRG analyzed EPA data from 1996, the most recent and comprehensive data available, to estimate the potential cancer risks associated with exposure to 33 air toxics - pollutants that can cause cancer, birth defects and other problems - that pose the greatest public health risk in urban areas.

The Clean Air Act set a goal of reducing the cancer risk from air toxics to less than one in one million. The report estimates national, state, and county risks and compares them to this cancer benchmark.

The report does not consider non-cancer health effects associated with the pollutants. Diesel soot has been linked to lung cancer and triggers asthma and other respiratory problems. The fine particles in diesel soot also can make existing heart and lung disease worse, and lead to premature death.

In 1996, Americans in every state and county in the continental U.S. were exposed to diesel soot at levels that far exceeded the one in one million standard. On average, Americans breathed levels of diesel soot more than 425 times the cancer benchmark concentration. Risks were highest in New York, New Jersey, the District of Columbia and Maryland.

The report shows that cars, trucks and non-road engines released more than half a million tons of diesel soot into the outdoor air in 1996. About 65 percent of these emissions were from construction equipment and other non-road diesel engines.

The report released today is one of a number of recent reports, including studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, that reach the same conclusion: diesel exhaust is dangerous to human health.

The EPA has committed to implementing new standards, adopted in 2001, for diesel trucks and buses. These standards will slash diesel emissions from trucks and buses by more than 90 percent, the equivalent of taking 13 million of the nation's trucks and buses off the roads.

The EPA is also developing new standards for diesel construction and farm equipment and their fuel, with a formal proposal due out next year. As part of this non-road diesel proposal, the administration is considering developing an emission trading program between the truck and non-road sectors.

"We remain concerned that a market based trading program could undermine the crucial emissions reductions required for diesel trucks and buses and compromise the clean up of non-road diesel engines," said U.S. PIRG's Figdor. "We plan to scrutinize any trading proposal very carefully."

The full report is available at: http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=8122&id3=USPIRG&

More Carbon Dioxide Could Reduce Crop Value

Carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas linked to global warming, could help crop plants grow and reproduce more in the temperate zones that now produce most of the world's food.

But the price of that bonus could be a reduction in the nutritional value of crops, said Peter Curtis, a professor of evolution, ecology and organismal biology at Ohio State University.

"If you're looking for a positive spin on rising CO2 levels, it's that agricultural production in some areas is bound to increase," Curtis said. "Crops have higher yields when more CO2 is available, even if growing conditions aren't perfect. But there's a tradeoff between quantity and quality. While crops may be more productive, the resulting produce will be of lower nutritional quality."

Nutritional quality declines because while the plants produce more seeds under higher CO2 levels, the seeds contain less nitrogen.

"The quality of the food produced by the plant decreases, so you've got to eat more of it to get the same benefits," Curtis said. "Nitrogen is a critical component for building protein in animals, and much of the grain grown in the United States is fed to livestock. Under the rising CO2 scenario, livestock - and humans - would have to increase their intake of plants to compensate for the loss."

Curtis and his colleagues conducted a meta-analysis, a technique in which researchers pull together data from a large number of similar studies and summarize the results. The 159 studies the researchers reviewed were published between 1983 and 2000.

The studies included data on crop and wild plant species' reproductive responses to the atmospheric CO2 levels predicted by the end of this century. Scientists expect CO2 levels to almost double by 2100.

The researchers analyzed eight different ways plants respond to higher CO2 levels: number of flowers; number of fruits; fruit weight; number of seeds; total seed weight; individual seed weight; the amount of nitrogen contained in seeds; and a plant's reproductive allocation, a measurement of a plant's capacity to reproduce.

Plants grown at higher CO2 levels had more flowers, more seeds, greater individual seed weight, greater total seed weight and lower concentration of nitrogen in their seeds than those grown at current levels of atmospheric CO2.

Under higher CO2 levels, crop plants showed a notable increase in reproduction while wild plants did not. On average, crops produced more fruits and seeds than did wild species.

"Wild plants are constrained by what they can do with increased CO2," Curtis explained. "They may use it for survival and defense rather than to boost reproduction. Agricultural crops, on the other hand, are protected from pests and diseases, so they have the luxury of using extra CO2 to enhance reproduction."

Individual crops varied in their response to increased CO2 levels. Rice seemed to be the most responsive, as its seed production increased an average of 42 percent. Soybeans followed with a 20 percent increase in seed, while wheat increased 15 percent and corn five percent.

Nitrogen levels decreased by an average of 14 percent across all plants except cultivated legumes, such as peas and soybeans.

"That's bad news," Curtis said. "Nitrogen is important for building protein in humans and animals. If anything, plant biologists want to boost the levels of nitrogen in crops. A growing global population demands more food, but humans would have to eat more of the food to get the same nutritional benefits."

The study was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation. It appears in the current issue of the journal "New Phytologist."

EPA Passes on Chemical Security Responsibility

In the agency's homeland security plan, released Wednesday, the EPA proposes voluntary security actions by the chemical industry. The issue of the vulnerability of chemical plants and storage sites to terrorist attacks has gained urgency since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Prior to the plan's release, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman and Office of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge had both supported new EPA regulations under the Clean Air Act to increase chemical plant security.

Whitman said Wednesday that the EPA will back homeland security legislation that would give oversight of chemical industry security to the new Department of Homeland Security. Bills to form that department are now stalled in the U.S. Senate.

The Chemical Security Act (S 1602), introduced by Senator Jon Corzine, would require new, mandatory measures to increase security at chemical plants. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed the bill unanimously in July.

But the bill is opposed by the industry groups including the American Chemistry Council and the American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS).

"In our judgment, this is a badly flawed proposal that actually would undermine security preparedness at factories, chemical facilities and other industrial sites, and we urge Congress to reject it in its entirety," wrote Jack Lichtenstein, director of government affairs and public policy at ASIS, in a letter to Congress opposing S 1602. Lichenstein said one of the reasons ASIS would not support S 1602 was the role it would give the EPA in overseeing chemical industry security, an area in which the EPA has no "background or expertise," he wrote.

But a number of public interest groups had hoped that the EPA would seek a strong role in protecting the public for terrorist attacks on the nation's chemical plants.

"EPA's strategy amounts to little more than pleading for industry's voluntary efforts and hoping for the best," wrote the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Apparently, EPA plans to 'work with' industry associations to encourage them to implement security enhancements, and to develop guidance for corporations to consider in deciding how, if at all, to address their vulnerabilities to terror attack. Entirely missing is any requirement that at risk facilities actually do something to secure themselves and reduce their attractiveness as a potential target."

EPA data shows that there are 123 chemical plants around the country that could each endanger a million or more people if attacked, and many more that could threaten thousands of people. A report by the Army Surgeon General ranked an attack on a chemical plant second only to a widespread biological attack in terms of the hazard to the public.

Investigative reports by newspapers around the countries have shown that many chemical facilities have lax security, with reporters able to anonymously access many sites.

Wastewater Treatment Security Bill Introduced

The bill was authored by Senator Jim Jeffords, the Vermont Independent who chairs the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee.

"We cannot forget the vital importance of protecting our nation's wastewater facilities," Jeffords said in introducing the bill.

"Everyday we take for granted the hundreds of thousands of miles of pipes buried underground and the thousands of wastewater treatment works that keep our water clean and safe," Jeffords continued. B"ut, like all our nation's critical infrastructure, the disruption or destruction of these structures could have a devastating impact on public safety and health."

The Wastewater Treatment Works Security and Safety Act of 2002 provides funds to assess vulnerabilities at wastewater plants and implement security improvements. The bill will help ensure long term safety and security at these plants by providing funds to research new technologies.

The bill also provides $15 million for grants to help small communities conduct vulnerability assessments, develop emergency response plans, and address potential threats to the treatment works. The Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies has endorsed the legislation.

The House of Representatives passed a similar bill, HR 5169, on September 5. Jeffords plans to move his bill forward in cooperation with other members of the Environment and Public Works Committee and the House.

Chemical Plants Fined for Air Pollution

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the city of Philadelphia filed the settlement last week in a Clean Air Act lawsuit against the company. Besides the fine, the chemical manufacturing company has agreed to comply with federal, state and local regulations curbing emissions of smog producing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ozone destroying chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

The plant's violations were identified by Air Management Services Division of the city of Philadelphia's Department of Public Health. The complaint alleged that Brotech violated VOC and CFC regulations at its Purolite facility, which manufactures resins that are used in industrial water purification systems.

The lawsuit alleged that Brotech failed to install required air pollution controls during major equipment upgrades in the 1990s. Under the Clean Air Act's New Source Review program, major sources of air pollution must install state of the art pollution control equipment as part of the construction or upgrade of facilities.

The suit also alleged that the company discharged excessive VOC emissions, violated VOC leak detection and repair requirements; violated equipment maintenance requirements designed to avoid the discharge of CFC containing refrigerants; and failed to obtain installation and operation permits for certain factory equipment.

In addition to the $400,000 penalty, to be divided equally between the U.S. and Philadelphia, the proposed consent decree requires Brotech to comply with all applicable federal, state and city air pollution control regulations. The company has also agreed to limit total VOC emissions to 20 tons per year, restrict production operations that produce hazardous air pollutants, and remove air pollution producing equipment that the company had not listed in its Clean Air Act permit and plan approval applications.

The proposed consent decree, filed with the court September 24, is subject to a 30 day public comment period and final court approval.

Missouri River Conservationists Consider Legal Remedies

Eric Eckl, spokesman for American Rivers, says the conservation community filed notice of intent to sue a number of years ago, but then things looked like they were going to improve, so legal action was not pursued.

But conservationists are concerned by an exchange of letters between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which results in a delay in the release of water down the Missouri River in the spring to the benefit of endangered species.

In a September 27 letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director of the Mountain-Prairie Region, Division Engineer Brigadier General David Fastabend says "unanticipated delays in the release of the final EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] for the Missouri River may preclude our agency from completing a final Record of Decision prior to spring 2003."

Fastabend assures the Service that endangered terns and piping plovers had a good reproductive season in 2002, and that there will be enough water to sustain the Corps' commitment under the Service's biological opinion and to satisfy its "Reasonable and Prudent Alternative."

Replying October 1, Fish and Wildlife Service regional director Ralph Morgenweck concurred with the Corps that foreseeable drought conditions in the basin next year would preclude higher spring flows on the river.

The conservation community accepts this assessment, said Eckl, noting that Service's Biological Opinion did not ask for increased springtime flows during years of drought or flood.

But river advocates pointed out that the Service appears to have also given the Corps a pass on the requirement to reduce flows next summer - a step required each year regardless of rainfall levels.

Defenders of the status quo say low summer flows on the Missouri could threaten city water supplies, reduce power plant capacity, and halt river navigation. But conservationists maintain that none of these predictions materialized this summer, despite dry conditions that kept water levels low.

Drought is merely the Army Corps' latest rationale to stall delivery of its new "Master Manual" guiding dam operations, American Rivers says. "Ecologically and economically straightforward, revisions have been mired by political controversy for 11 years due to fierce opposition from downstream shipping and agribusiness interests."

"Does the Army Corps want us to believe that they need rain to put ink in their printer cartridges to finalize the operations plan?," asked Chad Smith, director of American Rivers' Nebraska Field Office. "The Fish and Wildlife Service had not asked for a spring rise under drought conditions anyway."

"Without new scientific information, the Fish and Wildlife Service has no justification for letting the Corps off the hook on low flows next summer," Smith warned. "We're running out of faith that the agencies have the will to manage the Missouri River like it's 2002 and not 1960, and we'll be reviewing our options for seeking a remedy in court."

Grants Support Wildlife Habitat Purchases

The grants will aid efforts to protect federally threatened and endangered species or federal candidate species.

"The Pacific Region continues to have the highest number of imperiled species of any region in the nation," said Anne Badgley, director of the USFWS Pacific region, which includes Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Hawaii and U.S. affiliated Pacific islands. "These grants illustrate our effective partnerships with states and we look forward to working with them on projects that protect imperiled species."

The grants were awarded under Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act, which provides for funds to be given to states and territories, and through them, to communities and individuals, for species and habitat recovery actions on non-federal lands. Congress first funded Recovery Land Acquisition grants in 2001 in response to states' and landowners' growing interest in managing their lands in ways that benefit species and their habitats.

Non-federal project partners contributed an average of 25 percent of their projects' total costs.

The USFWS awarded the grants based on applications from states that support UFSWS approved endangered species recovery plans. Land acquisition and protection is often an essential element of a comprehensive plan to recover listed species. With land values increasing in many areas of the nation, the USFWS and the states sometimes lack the resources to acquire or protect key habitat needed to recover a species.

The Recovery Land Acquisition Grant program first received funding in fiscal year 2001 of $10.4 million. That year, the program awarded funding to 13 projects in 10 states, out of 46 proposals requesting more than $33.4 million.

In 2002, more than $17 million was available nationwide. The USFWS's six state Pacific Region received 12 proposals from states that totaled about $9.93 million.

In California, grants will help protect vernal pool habitat, habitat for salmon, steelhead and other fish, sandhill habitat for native insects and plants, breeding ponds for an endangered salamander, and sand dunes that support snails and kangaroo rats.

In the Pacific Islands, a grant will help protect habitat on Saipan for a variety of rare native species. Another grant will protect dunes and wetlands on Maui.

In Washington state, one grant will aid the endangered pygmy rabbit and several other species in the Columbia Basin. Another grant will help protect prairie and oak woodland habitat.

Washington Pulp Mill Fined for Toxic Releases

The mill was evacuated and several nearby roads were closed after a series of explosions released toxic gas, threatening public health and safety. The fine against the Weyerhaeuser pulp mill in Cosmopolis was issued by the state for violations of state air quality regulations.

"The community is extremely lucky that nobody was injured. This was a very dangerous situation that resolved itself quickly, thanks to good weather conditions and a quick response from the mill's workers," said Carol Kraege of the Department of Ecology (Ecology).

The mill's investigation revealed the toxic emission was caused by a lack of water necessary to absorb chlorine dioxide. The chlorine dioxide became unstable, causing pressure to build and burst the plastic piping. A compressor left in automatic mode allowed additional releases. Chlorine dioxide is used by the mill to bleach wood pulp for paper.

"Our priority was to make sure that our employees and the community were safe and fortunately they were," said Randy Cox, the mill's environmental health and safety manager. "We've now taken further precautions to prevent this from happening again."

The mill extracts cellulose from wood chips to manufacture chemical pulp, which is used to make products ranging from film to toothbrush handles. Weyerhaeuser has 15 days to apply to Ecology for relief from the penalty and 30 days to appeal it to the state Pollution Control Hearings Board.

Biodiversity Hotspots Detailed in New Website

The site - http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org - is intended to provide comprehensive, up to date information on the world's biologically richest and most threatened ecosystems. The website, funded by Intel Corporation, will be a resource for conservationists, regional planners and government policy makers.

The website showcases extensive information about each of the 25 hotspots including a rich array of photographs, ecosystem descriptions, as well as the unique species, threats and impacts and conservation actions in each area. An interactive map allows visitors to find information geographically and features downloadable maps and lists of threatened species. A glossary of terms explains biological and conservation terminology.

"The site will assist decision makers in government agencies, non-profit organizations, academic institutions and the conservation community in making informed decisions in the hotspots," said Carlos Galindo-Leal, senior director of the State of the Hotspots Program at CABS. "The site is dynamic and will be updated regularly with data gathered by experts working in these imperiled ecosystems."

The biodiversity hotspots are 25 biodiverse areas around the world that cover just 1.4 percent of Earth's land surface, but contain more than 60 percent of all terrestrial species. The hotspots are all threatened, many of them with less than 10 percent of their original habitat remaining.

"Conservation International focuses its work on biodiversity hotspots where the need is greatest and we can have the most impact," said Gustavo Fonseca, CI's senior vice president for science and executive director for CABS. "The collection, analysis and integration of hotspots data enable us to design the most effective strategies to avoid species extinctions, protect critical areas within the hotspots and ensure biodiversity survival over time."

Since the hotspots are dynamic places with political, social and biological changes taking place, they require continual assessment and monitoring. Monitoring the hotspots provides an opportunity to predict trends or anticipate threats before they occur.

This is the essence of an early warning system being developed by CABS that would enable the conservation community to take proactive measures. The site is a product of an ongoing initiative by CABS to gather, analyze and synthesize data on biological diversity, threats and conservation responses in these 25 ecosystems.

"We are proud to be a part of CI's effort to save global biodiversity for future generations," said Terry McManus of Intel Corporation's environmental health and safety division. "The 'Biodiversity Hotspots' web project is part of a larger initiative by CI and Intel to use computer and Internet technology to advance conservation science around the world."

Intel is also supporting the development of a network of scientists and institutions in the Philippines to monitor trends in biodiversity and socio-economic pressures in the hotspot.

The "Biodiversity Hotspots" site is the latest addition to CI's family of websites about biodiversity conservation with topics for many different audiences. To see all of the sites, visit: http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/fastfacts.xml. To learn more about the state of the hotspots, visit: http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org