I was always the type of kid to overdo things. When I read that McDonald’s was destroying rainforests to raise cattle, I went on strike. I refused to eat my chicken nuggets. I became a twelve-year-old environmentalist out to save the world — one certificate of ownership of an acre of rainforest in Brazil at a time. I think I tried to save a whale once and I know I have records of my investment in Brazil filed away somewhere.
I thought I grew out of it, but apparently not. See, being in a management position at The Reveille, I’m forced to keep up to date with the news. Reading recent stories from The Los Angeles Times to The Baton Rouge Advocate dealing with the Environmental Protection Agency reopened those flood gates for me.
On the local level, the Louisiana Environment Action Network, an independent organization, recently filed a lawsuit against the EPA for failing to revise its own standards for industrial pollution control. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review and revise the pollution standards every eight years to keep up with technological advances.
Adam Babich, director of the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic, which filed LEAN’s lawsuit, said the EPA had made no significant revisions to the standards since 1994. I’m sure pollutant emission technology has progressed a bit since then, and because most of Louisiana is on a downward spiral in terms of “cleanliness,” standards such as these are important.
This lawsuit is one of many LEAN has filed concerning the EPA. Which makes me wonder, if the EPA is supposed to be a watchdog of the state and industry, why are there independent organizations set up as watchdogs of the EPA?
This is where it gets complicated. The New York Times reported Jan. 6 that three of the EPA’s top enforcement officials resigned or retired over the holidays. The media was quick to pounce on the story because the officials’ departures came with heated words toward Pres. George W. Bush’s administration.
Bush’s administration has received much criticism for measures that have made it easier for industrial companies to bypass federal regulations. In November, the administration put a halt to more than 50 federal investigations into violations of the Clean Air Act. On top of that, many of the administrators Bush appointed to his committees that deal with environmental issues are lawyers who previously represented industrial giants.
The Bush administration is giving industry the easy way out — allowing them to use cheaper and less efficient equipment and giving them a more lenient time schedule to meet standards.
The EPA now has to enforce standards the administration prescribes, essentially changing its role from protection of the environment to protection of industry — a possible reason why three of its top enforcement officers left earlier this month.
In the Jan. 6 New York Times article, Rich Biondi, who retired as associate director of the air enforcement division of the EPA, said, “The rug was pulled out from under us. You look around and say, ‘What contribution can I continue to make here?'”
So, what does this all mean? Because the Bush administration is making it harder for the EPA to enforce laws on industry, the EPA isn’t doing its job. Because the EPA isn’t doing its job, environmental activist groups are stepping up to the plate to question their role.
Babich said he expects the EPA to respond to the lawsuit in a swift manner. He also expects LEAN and the EPA to reach a settlement, in which the EPA does what it’s required to do. But it’s important to note that it all started at the top and trickled down.
And heck, maybe by writing a column about this, I’m once again doing my own part to protect the environment.