Category Archives: Environment

Annenberg in the Dog House

By John Davis

The philanthropic Annenberg Foundation has undertaken many projects that benefit society as a whole. However, it’s proposal to build a dog and cat kennel on the wetlands preserve is absurd. The City of Palos Verdes flatly rejected this project.

It was then offered to the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, who accepted.

Cal DFW euphemistically calls the big dog house an,“interpretive center.”

As described, the project will also consist of retail, office space, and baseball diamonds. The footprint of the 46,000 square foot building would be extended by a parking lot. Builders’ stakes have already pierced the public land, even before the people decide if the project will go forward or not.

Cal DFG announced the big dog house will be part of the “restoration” of the Ballona Wetlands. The basic idea is oxymoronic. Placing a building on wetlands or upland habitat restores nothing.

Public agencies are not supposed to act as cheerleaders for projects they undertake. Their purpose is to inform the public, collect comments and execute the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. The agency is to remain neutral.

It appears that Annenberg foisted a stratagem on Cal DFW to build the wetland dog house. It provided to the State a document called, “Ballona opposition emails.”

On the other hand, Annenberg and Cal DFW arranged what it called “Conservations with the Neighbors,”  recording the attendance of two meetings. The public was not noticed. Only persons favored by the State Agency and Annenberg were invited, excluding all others.

The list included Cyndi Hench, President; Denny Schneider, Board Member and Past President; and Sibyl Buchanan, executive of Playa Capital Corporation and Board member, all from the Westchester/Playa Neighborhood Council. Elizabeth Zamora, Vice President of the Del Rey Neighborhood Council was invited too. Lisa Fimiani and Stephen Groner of the Friends of the Ballona Wetlands, a private business, participated.

Representatives of a number of non-profit businesses also attended, as did officials from the County of Los Angeles. The meetings were held on December 6th and 12th, 2012.

The list is long. It did not include the Venice Neighborhood Council.

The question is, why did a State Agency engage and meet with this select list of people and groups, while failing to let any other stakeholders participate? The VNC should clearly have been invited.

Annenberg wants a long-term lease on the public property. It would result in bulldozing and filling valuable habitat in the Ecological Wetlands Preserve. The land deed restrictions do not speak to a long-term lease. Only Annenberg has the connections to pull it off.

There is no money to complete the overall project. That is probably why Annenberg was let in. If the enormous outlay of taxpayer money necessary for the project was disclosed, the public would shudder.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment

Taxing Big Oil Could Mean Big Money

By Don Geagan

Why doesn’t California have a oil extraction tax? As the third largest oil producer in the United States, California is the only state that does not have such a tax on big oil and natural gas. Many attempts have been made to bring about such a tax, but due to the deep pockets of Big Oil, they have been able to block or forestall all efforts to enact such a common sense tax.

In 2006, proponents of such a tax failed to get the ballot initiative Prop 87 passed. Reason being, they were outspent 2 to 1 by Big Oil, and the false argument – or big lie – that such a tax would be passed on to the consumer. The reason that this is less than true is that the price of oil is set by the international market, not the California market.

But big money and big lies often work, thus Proposition 87 was soundly defeated 54 to 45%.

In 2012, there were three competing ballot initiatives to tax Big Oil and gas. The problem with so many competing ballot initiatives is that they confused voters just enough so that none was able to get the 500,000+ signatures necessary to get on the ballot. This time Big oil didn’t have to spend a dime.

In spite of such setback, all is not lost. There is currently an effort by UC Berkeley students to get the California Modernization and Economic Development Act on the ballot in 2014. The Act would implement a 9.5% severance tax on oil and natural gas extracted in California, and expects to create between $2 billion and $2.5 billion in revenue. The new revenues will be dedicated to increasing funding for education, state parks and county governments.

If you think that this tax is too large, remember that the great state of Alaska put a 25% tax on each barrel of oil taken out of the frozen ground of that state. Texas, the birthplace of modern oil, charges a 9% tax on its oil producers.

Again, only California gives the People’s resources away for free.

Whether you think another ballot initiative is a good idea or, as others have suggested, such a tax would have an easier time making its way through the California legislature, this giveaway to Big Oil has to stop.

It’s time for Big Oil to shoulder its responsibility and pay its long overdue debt to the people of California. The only real way to do that is through the levying of an oil severance tax.

If you would like more information on the California Modernization and Economic Development Act go to: https://www.facebook.com/cmedact and donate or volunteer today.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Don Geagan, Environment

Ballona Back Story

By John Davis

Many secrets surround that area of land just South of Venice called the Ballona Wetlands. The fundamental issues regard land ownership, government jurisdictions, and the story that is put forth for public consumption.

Prior to the arrival of the Spanish settlements, many generations of indigenous people made the bountiful land their home. Families were raised, lives were lived, and the ancestors were buried in the earth. A large settlement called Saagna rested atop the West Bluffs. Trails interconnected it to other local population centers.

At this time there were no land deeds recorded. This was the land of the Tongva Nation. Perhaps they felt the same way about the land as, Chief Plenty Coups, of the Crow did: “The ground on which we stand is sacred ground. It is the blood of our ancestors.” The Spanish settlements then brought European notions about granting vast tracts of land to individuals. California was included in the Viceroyalty of New Spain. Imagine that, Venice is a Viceroyality.

The Mission San Gabriel Archangel set the Spanish name Gabrieleno on the first-people in Los Angeles. Ranchos were not within the missions, nor were pueblos. The first was San Pedro. Ranchos were concessions of the Crown of Spain. The land was owned by the Crown while permitting certain elites to establish ownership rights. The grantees would operate them, prosper, and share the wealth with the King. The original people provided an untold amount of labor for these ventures, as it was in building missions. Many reports of slave labor arose from this time.

Rancho La Ballona was granted by Spain in 1819, covering an area bordered by Pico Blvd to the North and Playa del Rey to the South. The Easterly reach ended at Culver City and Mar Vista. In 1839, following Mexico’s successful revolution against Spain, Governor Alvarado granted Augustin Machado and Felipe Talamantes rights in the Rancho. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed in 1848 between Mexico and the United States to end their war. Terms allowed prior ownership to be honored. But, the land had to be recorded in the United States.

Claims were filed with the Board of California Land Commissioners in 1852. But, the land claims process was manipulated, allowing only a special few access to it. This is how the opportunity for Indigenous Peoples and others who should hold right to title were excluded from the process. The Machado-Talamantes holdings were approved in 1852, foreclosing forever on other legitimate claims to the land. The United States Supreme Court weighed in on this later in Summa v. California.

Since that time the land was divided and subdivided. The United States passed the Rivers and Harbors Act in the late 1800s. It was known as the first environmental law for the Country. The Act was used to construct public works on waters of the United States, consisting of rivers and harbors.

Around this time Venice was being built by its founder, Abbot Kinney. He requested permission to build a marina South of Washington Blvd. The Secretary of War denied his request because neither a river nor a harbor existed to be improved by the Act. After the region was subjected to destructive flooding in the late thirties, much of the LA River and Ballona Creek was channelized by the Army Corp of Engineers under related Flood Control Act. Since that time the storm waters flow swiftly to the sea, protecting property and infrastructure in low-lying areas, like Venice.

In 1954 LA County knocked on the Secretary of the Army’s door asking, as Abbot had done before, to build a small craft harbor. This time the Army agreed. After being authorized under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1954, U.S. Public Law 780, the Marina was constructed. Congress spelled out what the improvement would be. Only one administration building was authorized, along with some cabanas, with dock and shore works. The County promised to provide 8000 boat slips and to deed all lands easements and rights of way to the United States forever and in perpetuity. But, this is where the next land grab happened.

The General Plan of Improvement approved by the Congress in House of Representatives Document 389 included lands beginning North of Washington St. to West Eighty-Forth Street to the South and East to Lincoln Blvd. The County cheated and only claimed it deeded the U.S. an easement over the main channel.

This is only in the official County records. Howard Hughes objected formally in HD 389, implying that the Air Force needed to extend his quasi-government runway East of Lincoln to the West. The Secretary of the Air Force then rebuffed him in the House Document. But Hughes got the land anyway, and the land was passed through several corporate hands.

The State finally purchased the surface rights to a fraction of the original wetlands, with a private seller keeping any future water rights. The mineral rights did not go to the State either. By State, I mean us. The requirement to deed the lands to the U.S. Government was not met. The Army Corp of Engineers let the County get away with it. But then, the taxpayers still paid to construct the harbor for public purposes anyway, with no deed as U.S. Public Law 780 required. The County then changed the public small craft harbor to a commercial development without first seeking the permission from Congress. The varying Commanders of the USACE Los Angeles Division over time let this happen, knowing full well that only the Congress could make the change, not the local Army Corp Commanders.

The Corp was asked by the Senate Committee of Transportation to review H.D. 389 (MDR) and determine if any changes were warranted to the Congressional approval of the Project in 1993, after changes had already been made. The Corp began the requested process in 2005. It was supposed to be completed in 2008. Three million dollars was provided to complete it. In a letter from the Secretary of the Army to me in 2012, it was stated the process was continuing with no termination in sight. Then, the USACE Los Angeles District terminated the process in late 2012, with nothing to show for the three-million dollars of public investment.

Now, the same Corp trick is being played yet again. It announced it would conduct a different type of project. This one would not answer to Congress. It removed the scope of the first project and replaced it with a completely different plan. Now, District Army Corp Commander, Col. Mark Toy, is aiming another barge load of whale shit at the people. The new plan approves building 20 ft. concrete walls along Fiji Way, Lincoln Blvd, and Jefferson. The plan’s goal is to dig a giant basin to collect pollution from upstream polluters like a toilet, which will be cleaned at public expense.

A new giant public toilet would not be necessary if those point-source polluters upstream were stopped. But the big-money polluters want the public to pay for their cleanup at the end of the pipe, the new project. And the private development, Playa Vista, wants a flood control project to protect its private earnings. The project would require dredging up the Ballona Wetland and running roughshod over every bit of life that remains. There would be years of destruction, noise, air and water pollution. And it would all be for a project that is a failure from the start.

Dr. Shelly Luce, Executive Director and CEO of the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Foundation, a non-profit private business, deceptively calls this “a wetlands restoration”.  So does Dr. Mark Gold, formerly of Heal the Bay. The same thing happened at Malibu Lagoon last summer: a vibrant lagoon was turned into a morass of blood, death, and mud.  It too was called a restoration. Gold and Luce are the primary force behind both projects, one failed, and the next doomed to a similar fate, but on a massive scale. Both have their origins in the same non-profit, Heal the Bay. Many insiders have laughingly named it Steal the Bay, with what appears to be good reason.

The good news is there are a lot of caring people and environmental non-profits that oppose this project, steadfastly. Perhaps Chief Seattle said it best: “When the Earth is sick, the animals will begin to disappear; when that happens, The Warriors of the Rainbow will come to save them.”

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment

Chuck Cheats at Ballona

By John Davis

It is no surprise to environmental advocates that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife is trying to cheat environmental laws to build a 46,000 square foot building that would include an auditorium, parking lot, and retail (business) on the sensitive Ballona Wetlands Ecological Preserve.

Charles Bonham, the Executive Director of the Agency began an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the site in 2012 and held a public scoping meeting in mid 2012.

Now Chuck wants to start another EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), at the same place. However, CEQA makes no provisions for two EIRs to occur at the same place and time. EIRs can be amended or superseded only after they are finished. A subsequent, supplemental, or tiered EIR can add to or change an existing completed process.

Here, Chuck wants two at the same time, which is clearly illegal. The press release was issued on January 28th and the contact was Jordan Traverso. I asked her several questions about the process regarding public outreach for the project and how the current EIR process would be considered in the new proposal.

On January 29 she stated the following:  “Yes, of course it will go through CEQA. A new NOP should be issued this week.” Traverso is indicating that another Notice of Preparation (NOP) was being completed by the Agency for the new development. This CEQA would rest on top the EIR that is currently being undertaken.

The State is using your tax dollars to foist an illegal development on lands saved by the people and purchased by the State of California to preserve the sensitive habitat that contains endangered species and other important wildlife.

No consideration has been given to locating the proposed facilities off site. Chuck wants to build it right on the ecological preserve. He has been induced by money offered by the Annenberg Foundation. The Agency has gone so far as to enter a Memorandum of Understanding with other Agencies that are also promoting changing a portion of the ecological reserve into an auditorium, restaurant, and parking lot. The other signing Agencies include the State Coastal Conservancy and the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission.

While the proposal would have great merit if it were legal and located anyplace except in the preserve, it currently has none. There is no indication as to which retail business would be approved. Perhaps it will consist of either another Home Depot or a fast food joint ran by a clown named Ronald, or both. In keeping with the nature of the illegal proposal, be prepared for heron burgers and fried eagle.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment

Penmar Park Project Lacks Public Hearing

By John Davis

The City of Los Angeles has undertaken a project at Penmar Park to clean

dirty storm water before it reaches the ocean. The project is being completed by the City Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering. While the project appears to be sound, the process leading to it has had at least one procedural error.

Given the project is in a Park facility controlled by the City Recreation and Park Department and its Board, a hearing should have taken place so that the public could weigh in on the merits of the project at the Park Dpt. level. The rules of the Board of Recreation and Park Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles requires that, Posting of public hearings and land-use changes shall be made sufficiently in advance of Board meetings at the facility or facilities affected. “ The DPW responded that since the prior baseball diamond would be replaced that no change in land use existed. However, this disregards the fact that the new land use includes a massive new underground structure. A new land use in this case was added.

The Secretary of the Board confirmed that no hearing was held at Penmar by the Parks and Recreation Board for the project, removing the public from the process as it relates to the Park Board and land use changes at Penmar. While the Department of Public Works is conducting the project, it still requires a hearing by the Parks Board according to its rules.

The project seems good though. It consists of a large underground cistern, like a huge and very deep swimming pool. It is designed to catch polluted storm water from the street and to deposit in underground pool. It holds a maximum of 2.75 million gallons of polluted water. That water, according to the project manager, then trickles into the storm sewer. It is then cleaned by the Hyperion Water Treatment Plant before reaching the sea.

Importantly, a Phase 2 project is also in the works.

Phase 2, as described by DPW, would use some of the captured water for irrigation purposes at the park. One major question looms though. How would the water be treated before it is used on the grass at the park? This is very important because adults and their families sit on and touch the grass at the park.

No approval of Phase 2 exists yet and no permits for the California Environmental Quality Act have been filed. So, there is still time to weigh in on Phase 2 at the Recreation and Parks Board level as well as with the Board of Public Works, if the Parks Board follows its own written rules.

The concept is without question good for the environment, but only if the public is involved in the Parks Board hearings so that residents can ensure the quality of the water will be fit for human contact.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment

Stand Still for the Apocalypse

By Chris Hedges

Humans must immediately implement a series of radical measures to halt carbon emissions or prepare for the collapse of entire ecosystems and the displacement, suffering and death of hundreds of millions of the globe’s inhabitants, according to a report commissioned by the World Bank. The continued failure to respond aggressively to climate change, the report warns, will mean that the planet will inevitably warm by at least 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century, ushering in an apocalypse.

The 84-page document,“Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4°C Warmer World Must Be Avoided,” was written for the World Bank by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics and published last week. The picture it paints of a world convulsed by rising temperatures is a mixture of mass chaos, systems collapse and medical suffering like that of the worst of the Black Plague, which in the 14th century killed 30 to 60 percent of Europe’s population. The report comes as the annual United Nations Conference on Climate Change begins this Monday [Nov. 26] in Doha, Qatar.

A planetwide temperature rise of 4 degrees C—and the report notes that the tepidness of the emission pledges and commitments of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will make such an increase almost inevitable—will cause a precipitous drop in crop yields, along with the loss of many fish species, resulting in widespread hunger and starvation. Hundreds of millions of people will be forced to abandon their homes in coastal areas and on islands that will be submerged as the sea rises. There will be an explosion in diseases such as malaria, cholera and dengue fever. Devastating heat waves and droughts, as well as floods, especially in the tropics, will render parts of the Earth uninhabitable. The rain forest covering the Amazon basin will disappear. Coral reefs will vanish. Numerous animal and plant species, many of which are vital to sustaining human populations, will become extinct. Monstrous storms will eradicate biodiversity, along with whole cities and communities. And as these extreme events begin to occur simultaneously in different regions of the world, the report finds, there will be “unprecedented stresses on human systems.” Global agricultural production will eventually not be able to compensate. Health and emergency systems, as well as institutions designed to maintain social cohesion and law and order, will crumble. The world’s poor, at first, will suffer the most. But we all will succumb in the end to the folly and hubris of the Industrial Age. And yet, we do nothing.

“It is useful to recall that a global mean temperature increase of 4°C approaches the difference between temperatures today and those of the last ice age, when much of central Europe and the northern United States were covered with kilometers of ice and global mean temperatures were about 4.5°C to 7°C lower,” the report reads. “And this magnitude of climate change—human induced—is occurring over a century, not millennia.”

The political and corporate elites in the industrialized world continue, in spite of overwhelming scientific data, to place short-term corporate profit and expediency before the protection of human life and the ecosystem. The fossil fuel industry is permitted to determine our relationship to the natural world, dooming future generations. Carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, increased from its pre-industrial concentration of about 278 parts per million (ppm) to more than 391 ppm in September 2012, with the rate of rise now at 1.8 ppm per year. We have already passed the tipping point of 350 ppm; above that level, life as we have known it cannot be sustained. The CO2 concentration is higher now than at any time in the last 15 million years. The emissions of CO2, currently about 35 billion metric tons per year, are projected to climb to 41 billion metric tons per year by 2020.

Because about 90 percent of the excess heat trapped by the greenhouse effect since 1955 is momentarily in the oceans, we have begun a process that, even if we halted all carbon emissions today, will ensure rising sea levels and major climate disruptions, including the continued melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets as well as the acidification of the oceans. The report estimates that if warming accelerates toward 4 degrees Celsius, sea levels will rise 0.5 to 1 meter, possibly more, by 2100. Sea levels will increase several meters more in the coming centuries. If warming can be keep to 2 degrees or below, sea levels will still rise, by about 20 centimeters by 2100, and probably will continue to rise between 1.5 and 4 meters above present-day levels by the year 2300. Sea-level rise, the report concludes, is likely to be below 2 meters only if warming is kept to well below 1.5 degrees. The rise in sea levels will not be uniform. Coastal areas in tropical regions will be inundated by sea-level rises that are up to 20 percent higher than those in higher latitudes.

“In particular, the melting of the ice sheets will reduce the gravitational pull on the ocean toward the ice sheets and, as a consequence, ocean water will tend to gravitate toward the Equator,” the report reads. “Changes in wind and ocean currents due to global warming and other factors will also affect regional sea-level rise, as will patterns of ocean heat uptake and warming. Sea-level rise impacts are projected to be asymmetrical even within regions and countries. Of the impacts projected for 31 developing countries, only 10 cities account for two-thirds of the total exposure to extreme floods. Highly vulnerable cities are to be found in Mozambique, Madagascar, Mexico, Venezuela, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. For small island states and river delta regions, rising sea levels are likely to have far ranging adverse consequences, especially when combined with the projected increased intensity of tropical cyclones in many tropical regions, other extreme weather events, and climate change-induced effects on oceanic ecosystems (for example, loss of protective reefs due to temperature increases and ocean acidification).”

“By the time the concentration reaches around 550 ppm (corresponding to a warming of about 2.4°C in the 2060s), it is likely that coral reefs in many areas would start to dissolve,” the report reads. “The combination of thermally induced bleaching events, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise threatens large fractions of coral reefs even at 1.5°C global warming. The regional extinction of entire coral reef eco-systems, which could occur well before 4°C is reached, would have profound consequences for their dependent species and for the people who depend on them for food, income, tourism, and shoreline protection.” The report projects that the rates of change in ocean acidity over the next century will be “unparalleled in Earth’s history.”

The global production of maize and wheat has, because of rising temperatures, been in steady decline since the 1980s. But these crop declines will be vastly accelerated in the coming years, with rising temperatures resulting in widespread malnutrition and starvation. It will mean that the poor, and especially children, will endure chronic hunger and malnutrition. There will be an increase in a variety of deadly epidemic diseases. Persistent flooding will contaminate drinking water, spreading diarrheal and respiratory illnesses. The 2012 drought, which affected 80 percent of the agricultural land in the United States, will become the norm. Tropical South America, Central Africa and all tropical islands in the Pacific are, the report says, likely to regularly experience heat waves of unprecedented magnitude, making human life in these areas difficult if not impossible to sustain.

“In this new high-temperature climate regime, the coolest months are likely to be substantially warmer than the warmest months at the end of the 20th century,” the report reads. “In regions such as the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and the Tibetan plateau, almost all summer months are likely to be warmer than the most extreme heat waves presently experienced. For example, the warmest July in the Mediterranean region could be 9°C warmer than today’s warmest July.” It notes that these changes “potentially exceed the adaptive capacities of many societies and natural systems.”

The stress and insecurity caused by the breakdown in the climate will, the report says, “have negative effects on psychological and mental health.” It will lead to an increase in “levels of conflict and violence.” These changes “will have ramifications for national identification and alter the dynamics of traditional cultures.”

pastedGraphic.pdfThe report calls on the leaders of the industrial world to immediately institute radical steps—including a halt to the dependence on fossil fuels—to keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees C, although the report concedes that even an increase of less than 2 degrees would result in serious damage to the environment and human populations. Without a massive investment in green infrastructure that can adapt to the heat and other new extreme weather, and in the building of efficient public transportation networks and renewable energy systems to minimize carbon emissions, we will succumb to our own stupidity.

A failure to respond will assure an ecological nightmare that will most probably be accompanied by an economic, social and political breakdown. The human species, the report says, will cross “critical social system thresholds,” and “existing institutions that would have supported adaptation actions would likely become much less effective or even collapse.” The “stresses on human health, such as heat waves, malnutrition, and decreasing quality of drinking water due to seawater intrusion, have the potential to overburden health-care systems to a point where adaptation is no longer possible, and dislocation is forced.”

“There is also no certainty that adaptation to a 4°C world is possible,” it goes on. “A 4°C world is likely to be one in which communities, cities and countries would experience severe disruptions, damage, and dislocation, with many of these risks spread unequally. It is likely that the poor will suffer most and the global community could become more fractured, and unequal than today. The projected 4°C warming simply must not be allowed to occur—the heat must be turned down.”

 

This article was first published on Truthdig (www.truthdig.com

Thank you for allowing us to re-print.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment

California Coastal Commission Silences Pacific Gas & Electric’s Airguns

By Krista Schwimmer

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012, the California Coastal Commission unanimously and vehemently denied Pacific Gas & Electric Company a permit that would have allowed them to conduct a high energy seismic survey off shore of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, along the Central Coast of California. To accomplish this goal, the Research Vessel, Marcus Langseth, would have towed numerous airguns, sending out high level sound impulses, in excess of 240 decibels, every few minutes, 24 hours a day, for a minimum of 12 days. No one in the room disagreed that such a barrage of sound would have some kind of a harmful effect. The question before the Commission then was whether or not P G & E could prove the survey’s benefit outweighed its inevitable harm.

The hearing, which took place in the Santa Monica Auditorium, lasted the entire day, reflecting both the enormity of the issue and the passion it stirred in a diverse set of people unified by this one issue. The California Coastal Commission received between 150 and 170 speaker cards to testify. As the day progressed, it became evident that all but P G & E were there in protest.

The California Coastal Commission opened the hearing with background history and then, their staff findings.  The lengthy and complex backstory included the passage of Assembly Bill 1632 requiring an assessment of the potential vulnerability of the state’s two nuclear plants; the Energy Commission’s report requesting P G & E to update their plant’s seismic hazard assessment; and the California Public Utilities Commission directives to P G & E for their 2014 licensing renewal. Although the California Commission’s own staff recommended the denial of P G & E’ s request, the company was granted the hearing under a “special approval” clause called the Coastal Dependent Industrial Facility Override Policy.

Making the case for P G & E was Mark Krausse. Krausse claimed that 3D high-energy offshore studies were needed to evaluate geometry and potential intersection of offshore faults. As for the use of such powerful airguns, he sited bridge piling, with its 250 decibel sound source, as a precedent. In his closing statement, Krausse argued that the “essential issue” was “one of public safety pitted against environmental protection.” Krausse’s hopeless position before the Commission was reminiscent of the song, “Alice’s Restaurant”, when Officer Obie, with his 8×10 color glossy pictures as evidence, watches in dismay as the judge walks in with a seeing eye dog. (Though, in this case, Krausse was up against a Commission and coastal community with hawk eyes for vision!)

At this point, a group of 9 environmental notorieties – including Surfriders, Sierra Club, and NRDC – led the seismic attack. The day-long testimony consisted of intelligent, passionate, and spiritual arguments against such a form of surveying that one grandmother said, would create “an acoustic prison” for the more than 2,000, friendly, Morro Bay porpoises who reside there. There was the organized presentation of environmentalists that showed the potential injury to the marine life there, as well as the ripple effect of it on the whole Marine Protected Area network. There was the fishermen and City of Morro Bay itself that spoke of the negative economic effect in that area. There were grandmothers, physicians, lawyers, and the 12 year old Aaron from San Luis Obispo who told the Commission that “the choices that you make now define integrity for our children.” Whether it was the fact that the harbor porpoise can suffer injuries at merely 164 decibels of sound or the dismissal of the ridiculous notion that it was ok for the endangered otters there as they hold their head above water, the crowd came well-prepared. Such levels of sound, too, could actually harm swimmers and surfers, unaware of the testing.

Some of the most moving testimony was given after lunch by speakers for the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation. Fred Collins, Tribal Administrator for the Northern Chumash, began by reflecting on the very close connection his people have always had for the animal and plant nations. His own family, he said, comes from the village where Diablo Canyon is built. He called this issue, “the biggest issue that ever has been along our coastline.” The second Chumash speaker, Mati Waiya, went more deeply into the Chumash tribe’s longtime connection to this land – 30,000 years, according to his elders. He called his tribe, “the dolphin people”, who teach their children the relationship to the dolphins and the memory that “our whales carry. As families, (the whales) travel in pods and they mourn the death of their loved ones. Just like you do.” He told the Commission that “you carry the tear of the whales in your hand,” advising them to see truth through the smoke and mirrors before them.” He ended by asking them not to “wake up this land by this testing. Because you’ll regret it. This is what our ancestors say.” He also indicated, like the speaker before him, his trust in the Coastal Commission. “No one has the permit to take lives,” he concluded.

At the end of the hearing, when it came time to vote, the audience soon learned how seriously the California Coastal Commission took this request. Not only did each Commissioner vote against it, many shared stories of his or her unique connection to the ocean and its inhabitants. Dr. William Burke spoke of how he had once wanted to be an ichthyologist; but now has 9 salt water tanks at his home, filled with what he deems are “his children.”  Commissioner Connie Stewart mentioned how she, too, once touched a whale and found it powerful.

For many compelling reasons – ranging from the scientific to the spiritual – the California Coastal Commission denied P G & E that day. In doing so, they showed that they can be powerful allies to the coastal inhabitants – whether they live in or along the water. It was, indeed, a marvelous victory for marine life and lovers.

And yet, in the shadow of this victory, lies another, pressing concern, brought up throughout the day by commissioner and citizen alike. Should Diablo Canyon Power Plant even be there anymore? Rather than renewing their license in 2014, should we instead be scurrying to find solar and other energy solutions?

Answering this question could indeed be California’s next seismic matter.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Beach, Environment, Krista Schwimmer

Stop Flying Over My Head

By Martin Rubin

Santa Monica Airport flights should go back over Santa Monica, where they belong.

Historical facts show that for more than two decades changes to flight operations at Santa Monica Airport (SMO)  moved the airport’s impacts away from Santa Monica to over Venice. That’s a fact.

It was 1990 when SMO’s “departure-to-the-west” rules were changed. Instead of aircraft turning over Santa Monica after leaving the runway, they went straight out over Rose Avenue all the way to the ocean before turning, bypassing Santa Monica altogether. Remember when it was possible to sit out in the front patio of the Rose Cafe without the noise of jets blasting overhead?

Santa Monica and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) didn’t just dump noise on Venice. As it turned out, in order to maintain a safe separation distance, the new departure rule over Venice meant that planes needed permission from the LAX control tower before they could take off. This resulted in long idle times on the east end of the runway with corporate and private jets sitting in cue for over an hour at times, spewing toxic pollution across Bundy Drive into the once quiet West Los Angeles bedroom community of North Westdale.

Even before Venice noticed the new noise impacts of jet traffic, residents in North Westdale complained to officials right away because jet fumes have a strong kerosene odor and are sickening. But their complaints fell on deaf ears as corporate and private jet traffic was allowed to grow at an astronomical rate. Can you imagine a 1,800% increase in jet traffic from 1983 until 2007? Throughout the entire year 1983 there were 578 jet takeoffs. That’s about 1 or two a day on average.

It was 1984 when the FAA and Santa Monica signed the Santa Monica Airport Agreement that remains in effect until July 1, 2015. The intent of the agreement was to lessen the impact of aircraft operations for all homes and neighborhoods around the airport. Really? The results show the intent was a complete failure.

Between 1986 and 1989 airport improvement projects were undertaken and the runway went through an expensive overlay so that corporate and private jet traffic would have a smooth landing surface.

In 1990, when jet operations grew to about double the 1983 level, Santa Monica residents near the flight path probably started to complain, or maybe Santa Monica city officials were forewarned about the inevitable influx of corporate and private jets about to arrive. Because in 1990 Santa Monica requested that the takeoff pattern be changed from making noise over Santa Monica to instead making noise over Venice. So it was that jet traffic as well as other instrument rated aircraft began to fly out over Venice, and continue to do so despite the resultant huge environmental increase in toxic air pollution. Jet traffic increased from an average of 1 to 2 takeoffs a day to more than 25 takeoffs a day, sometimes more than 40 jet takeoffs in one day, dumping the noise over Venice and the devastating toxic air pollution into North Westdale.

There’s more. Santa Monica Airport has certain “recommendations” and “ordinances” which coincide with the airport’s “Fly Neighborly” program. For example, “Visual Flight Departure Rules” for fixed-wing aircraft and for helicopters departing to the west are requested to overfly the Penmar Golf Course and initiate northerly turns at the shoreline and southerly turns at or after Lincoln Boulevard. This includes all the pattern flights of the seven flight schools that account for approximately half of all the flights out of SMO. So, not only do instrument (IFR) flight departures to the west go straight out over Venice to the ocean due to the new 1990 rule, but SMO also requests that all the other visual flights (VFR) avoid flying over Santa Monica.

Santa Monica’s fly neighborly program is anything but neighborly. It appears that Santa Monica wants no impacts from their own airport. However, Santa Monica city officials are extremely proud that Santa Monica is now being referred to as Silicon Beach. Understand that it is a Silicon Beach built on toxic air polluting corporate and private jets buzzing into and out of their private comfortable jet port.

Recently, Santa Monica residents in the Ocean Park community just north of Venice cried out that they don’t want the FAA to return any part of the old takeoff route over Santa Monica. Understandable, but  is that really fair? SMO impacts should be distributed in a way that would minimize the overall impacts and free up aircraft to take off without undue delays. Santa Monica should understand that if they decide to keep SMO operating after July 1, 2015, Santa Monica will bear their fair share of impacts from all flights. Venice residents don’t want them just as much as anyone.

Join Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution to help fight this environmental, health and safety injustice. Website: www.jetairpollution.com.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Environment, Everyday Living, Santa Monica Airport

Stealth Flood Control Project

By John Davis

On September 26, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers announced a major flood control project to protect the Playa Vista development. Internal documents estimate the cost at $100-200 million to the taxpayers.

The agencies working in concert are the California Coastal Conservancy, the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, the Department of Fish and Game, and the Army Corp of Engineers Los Angeles District.

All are engaging in a stealth marketing campaign to spin the real nature of the project. They call it a “wetlands restoration,” but it is anything but that. Major wetlands and watercourses will be dredged, then filled. Valuable wildlife will be killed and scattered. State groundwater resources will be negatively impacted.

Proposition 12 and 50 funds, approved by the public, were supposed to be spent in part for environmental restoration and acquisition of wetlands. Part of that public money has been misused by the California Coastal Conservancy to propel only one project agency documents call the, “preferred alternative.” The public had no formal voice in this plan. Preferred by who, is the question begged.

The project would serve the interests of the private Playa Vista development. It was constructed in a well-known floodplain flooded by storm waters in 1938.

The plan is to dredge a big basin for polluted water, then pile the wetlands material into 20-40 foot dirt levees on Lincoln, Jefferson, and elsewhere near the Marina and Playa del Rey. The mounds of dirt will stand taller than most houses, and never move. This will ruin the great views of wetlands that drivers see everyday.

The developers knew the project would flood again, sooner or later. So did the City planners. But, it was built anyway. With an eye to short term profits, the developers only hoped the project would not flood until after they took the money and ran.

Now the people are being asked to bail the developers out of their bad real estate gamble by footing the bill to protect a private corporation from floodwaters that are sure to come again.

It’s the destruction of Malibu Lagoon all over again, only on a monumental scale.

When you hear the project shopped as a “wetlands restoration,” don’t take the bait. It is a flood control plan to protect Playa Vista, a private development at public expense.

There is still hope to preserve the wetlands. You can support your local environmental groups including the Grassroots Coalition, the Ballona Ecological Education Project, and the Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, all of which share concerns about this proposal.

The Sierra Club, the oldest grassroots environmental group in the world, opposed the project at the Airport Marina Regional Group. John Muir founded the club long ago and its accomplishments have been instrumental in the preservation of California’s natural heritage

Leave a Comment

Filed under Beach, Environment

Let the Sun Shine on World Peace and a Greener Tomorrow

By Don Geagan

Imagine a world where energy is clean and free. Where nations no longer have to encroach on, or fight over, their neighbor’s resources and where concerns over global warming are a thing of the past. Sounds like a fairytale or heaven on earth? Thanks to a major breakthrough in solar technology, that is what researchers at UCLA are apparently developing in our own back yard.

UCLA’s California Nanosystems Institute announced an organic polymer that can turn virtually any hard, flat surface into an electric power generator. The applications boggle the mind, and when fully developed, will transform the way that humanity develops and utilized electric power.

This “solar film” literally harvests light and turns it into electricity. It can be applied to the exteriors of buildings, and equally stunning, this polymer can be applied to the outside of cars and airplanes and may, very well, do way with the need to ‘fill up the tank’. Since this miraculous substance is also organic, it has the potential to mitigate, if not alleviate, global warming.

Along with the solar film, researchers have developed a new electrode, a metal, which appears to be transparent. Thus you have a new solar cell. But the truth is, the electrode is not actually transparent, it’s just that the silver nanowires are so small that they are imperceivable to the human eye. These nanowires are about one one-thousandth the width of a single strand of human hair.

This malleable and highly durable polymer utilizes the infrared part of the light spectrum.  Currently, isolating the infrared spectrum is a less-efficient way to make electricity, converting about 6% of the sun’s energy into electrical current. Researchers believe that by using the new technology they will double or even triple that conversion rate in 3 to 5 years.

When you consider that enough sunlight hits the Earth’s surface in one hour to power the entire world for a year, the potential of these new photovoltaic cells to generate clean and free energy is inexhaustible.

The Obama administration is currently pushing hard for more “Green technology”. It appears that this new solar film is the greenest of green technology.

As astounding as all these technological and energy breakthroughs sound, one must consider the rather positive international ramifications of such a new energy paradigm. Namely, the lessening of tensions and/or wars now fought over our planet’s very limited natural resources.

In other words, no more blood for oil. No more need for hundreds of American military bases all over the world in order to protect U.S. oil company’s pipelines and profits.

Could harnessing the true power of the sun actually bring about world peace?

It sure couldn’t hurt.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Don Geagan, Environment