By Rebecca Bowe

Jan. 7 (GNT) — Industrial fishing in all US waters north of the Bering Strait is banned until further notice, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council ruled in a unanimous vote on Feb. 5. The precautionary measure aims to protect Arctic marine ecosystems, which are in a precarious position due to the destabilizing effects of global climate change.

Walrus are among the key species threatened by lose of sea ice. Commercial fishing in the Arctic could further effect walrus populations. Photo courtesy of US FWS.

Spanning some 200,000 square miles north of Alaska, the protected area encompasses US waters of the Chukchi Sea and Beaufort Sea. Since commercial fishing has never existed in this region, which is frozen for much of the year, the ban signifies a rare move to preserve uncharted territory before industry moves in, rather than after the fact.

“The cumulative effect of commercial fishing and shipping, as well as open-ended oil and gas development, could be devastating to this highly fragile system if not done correctly,” said Josh Reichert, managing director of the Pew Environment Group. “Rarely are we given a chance to put an area’s value as an ecosystem ahead of its commercial potential. Too often we get it wrong by depleting resources first and then backpedaling to return a place to its former grandeur.”

Global climate change has caused the Arctic to warm twice as fast as the rest of the planet, resulting in an unprecedented 40 percent loss of summer sea-ice cover. To commercial fishing interests, the suddenly ice-free waters present a new economic opportunity, especially with northward migrations of fish populations suited for warmer waters. But opening the gates to commercial fishing couldn’t come at a worse time, scientists argue, as the effects of climate change are already crippling fragile Arctic ecosystems.

For marine mammals such as polar bears, walrus and ice seals, the shrinking platforms of sea ice translate to a loss of critical habitat. Scientists and policy makers fear that commercial fishing could put food pressure on these already troubled species. The disappearance of these key species could, in turn, disrupt the entire food chain, leaving more species vulnerable. According to a letter to the NPFMC drafted by a team of marine scientists, “Recent sea ice losses threaten to fundamentally transform marine food webs in the Arctic.”

Nor are marine creatures the only ones who would be affected by expansion of commercial fishing into the Arctic. Subsistence fishing is central to the economy and culture of indigenous communities living along Alaska’s northern coast, and commercial fishing in the region could devastate traditional fishing areas.

Conservation organizations, including Audubon Alaska, Oceana, the Ocean Conservancy and the Pew Environment Group applauded the Council’s move to protect the Chukchi and Beaufort seas.

“Today’s decision signals a new day in the Arctic, where science comes first and where we think about the consequences of our actions before we take them,” said Janis Searles Jones, vice president of the Ocean Conservancy. “This proactive decision by the Council removes one source of additional stress, giving the Arctic, its peoples and animals a better chance to adapt to the changes.”

The National Marine Fisheries Service is expected to approve the Arctic commercial-fishing ban and issue final regulations to protect the Arctic later this year. However, because the ban was approved in part because of a lack of in-depth information about Arctic marine fish stocks and potential ecosystem effects, it could be lifted at some point in the future if new information is produced showing a viable way to conduct commercial fishing there.

Meanwhile, the 200,000 miles under U.S. control represents just a small portion of Arctic waters. So far, no other nations have taken such preventative steps to protect marine life from overexploitation in light of the debilitating effects of climate change.

Some species found in the Arctic, including the polar bear, bowhead whale and spectacled eider (a kind of sea bird) are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act.

According to a report issued for the United Nations-led World Summit on Sustainable Development, 75 percent of the major marine fish stocks are either depleted, overexploited or being fished at their biological limit.

GreenNewsToday.org

By Shawn Gaynor

Jan. 28 (GNT) — According to scientists, the oceans of the world have become about 30 percent more acidic due to human carbon dioxide emissions — and this spells trouble for ocean life.

Rich in biodiversity, coral reefs like this one in Florida are under threat from increases in the ocean's acidity. Photo courtesy of Tropical Conservancy.

The Environmental Protection Agency agreed last week to review how ocean acidification, a result of atmospheric carbon dioxide pollution, should be addressed under the federal Clean Water Act.

Approximately half of the carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere from human activities over the past 200 years has been absorbed by the oceans and as a result has lowered average ocean pH by 0.11 units.

While the change is smaller then what is currently regulated under EPA clean water standards, scientist say further increases in ocean acidity could mean doom for many ocean creatures, and the overall ecosystems of the ocean.

“Global warming’s evil twin, ocean acidification, is the most insidious threat to our ocean ecosystems,” said Miyoko Sakashita, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, who petitioned the EPA to examine the issue.

The petition, filed by the Center for Biological Diversity back in Dec. of 2007, called on the EPA to consider rule changes to the Clean Water Act that would consider new science about ocean acidification, and lower the pH level regulated for water.

If the EPA decides to issue a rules change it would require states to designate water bodies that do not meet the new water-quality standards as “impaired” and take action to limit their pollution. This could lead to state-level regulation of atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Water Act.

Oceans store about 50 times more carbon dioxide than the atmosphere, and over time, roughly ninety percent of carbon dioxide emitted into the air from burning of fossil fuels will be absorbed by the ocean.

Unlike global climate change, ocean acidification takes place through a basic chemical reaction and therefore it is easier for scientists to accurately predict future ocean pH changes due to carbon-dioxide emissions.

The oceans currently absorb about 22 million tons of carbon dioxide per day. Scientists agree that the oceans will acidify an additional 0.4 pH by the end of the century under current carbon dioxide emission trajectories.

According to the studies cited by the CBD, the primary known impact of acidification is impairment of calcification, the process whereby corals, crabs, abalone, oysters, sea urchins, and other animals make shells and skeletons. Studies of marine species that build shells or skeletons from calcium carbonate nearly all experience deterioration when exposed to increasing carbon dioxide levels in seawater. In fact, studies have shown that at carbon dioxide concentrations likely to occur by 2030, the shells of many marine species would deform or dissolve.

Many species of phytoplankton and zooplankton, which form the basis of the marine food web, are also particularly vulnerable to ocean acidification. Already coral reefs worldwide have suffered mass die-offs as a result of ocean acidification.

“In just a few decades, ocean acidification will unravel a delicate balance of underwater diversity that took millions of years to build,” said Sakashita. “Absent quick regulatory action to address ocean acidification, we will likely see catastrophic impacts on our ocean ecosystems, including the near-complete loss of coral reefs.”

The ocean has been more acidic in some geologic periods. However, according to Sick Seas, a report published in the journal Nature in 2006, the current increase in ocean acidity is an unprecedented 100 times faster than any other rise in at least the last hundreds of thousands of years. The gradual nature of previous acidification cycles left time for marine life to adjust though evolution to the new conditions.

The EPA’s letter responding to the CBD’s petition agrees with the need for review in light of new science, and commits to a course of action.

“We plan to publish a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) by April 15th, and we plan to publish guidance regarding coral biocriteria by the end of 2009,” stated the EPA. In return, the CBD will suspend a lawsuit file over EPA inaction on its 2007 petition.

When the EPA issues a NODA, it opens an issue to comment, solicits expert opinion, and considers new scientific data. After examining the science the EPA will determine whether the current water-quality criterion for pH under the Clean Water Act should be modified to address ocean acidification.

“EPA’s commitment to review its water-quality criterion in light of ocean acidification marks an important step toward taking action under the Clean Water Act to begin to address this perilous threat, ” said Sakashita.

GreenNewsToday.org

Jan. 27 (GNT) — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has named Todd Stern the new Special Envoy for Climate Change at the State Department. Stern, appointed on Jan. 26, will be the administration’s chief climate negotiator.

On Jan. 26 Hillary Clinton appointed Todd Stern Special Envoy on Climate Change. Photo Courtesy of US State Department.

Speaking at the announcement, Clinton said that by appointing a Special Envoy the US is sending a message that it is serious about addressing global climate change.

“Our world is facing a climate crisis. It is at once an environmental, economic, energy and national security issue with grave implications for America’s and the world’s future,” said Clinton.

Stern worked for Bill Clinton’s administration from 1993 to 1998. While there, he acted as the senior White House representative for the Kyoto negotiations.

“We will need a strong, new multilateral agreement,” said Stern, who will be expected to negotiate at the new round of the United Nations Climate Change Conference this December in Copenhagen. Stern’s appointment signals a broad departure from Bush administration polices, under which the US held back efforts by European countries to address climate change on an international level.

“We will need to engage in vigorous, creative diplomacy to dramatically reduce emissions. And we will need to work with vulnerable regions and countries to help them adapt to the climate change that is already locked into the system,” added Stern.

The announcement comes a day after the release of a groundbreaking study by McKinsey & Company which charted in detail an affordable path to avert unmitigated climate change.

GreenNewsToday.org

By Shawn Gaynor

Jan. 26 (GNT) — Efforts to promote a large-scale shift away from fossil fuels are often met with skepticism because of the high price tag associated with alternative energy generation. But a new report suggests that the costs of avoiding the worst effects of climate change are actually reasonable.

Pathways to a Low Carbon Economy, released Jan. 26 by McKinsey & Company, concludes that global greenhouse-gas emissions could be reduced by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, the level scientists say is necessary to keep global warming below the critical 2 degree C rise.

The McKinsey study, backed by an assortment of industrial and environmental partners ranging from energy giant Shell, to the crusading World Wildlife Fund, estimates the cost achieving these reductions are between 0.2 and 0.5 percent of global Gross Domestic Product. That compares with Lord Stern’s estimated cost of not taking action on greenhouse gas emissions of between five and 20 percent of global GDP.

The most comprehensive study of its kind, it identifies three main sectors critical to meeting CO2 emissions reduction goals. The study recommends a dramatic and immediate move away from carbon-based electricity generation towards renewable energy, halting deforestation and investing massively in reforestation, and an increase in everyday energy efficiency by 25 percent.

“The figures show clearly that not only can we move to a low carbon economy, but that the costs are manageable. Adopting these measures will be a major step towards avoiding the worst effects of climate change,” said WWF Director General James Leape.

The study goes on to identify in detail over 200 opportunities for significant emissions reductions over the next two decades. While the cost of implementation is manageable, amounting to a roughly a half of trillion dollars in worldwide investment each year, the report warns that individual sectors and policy makers will face huge implementation challenges.

“The timing of action is though critical: Delays are likely to mean missing this two degrees Celsius target. Capturing the full abatement potential requires starting promptly in 2010,” the study warns. “For every year of delay, the expected peak level of atmospheric GHG concentration will rise by an extra five parts per million (ppm) and a 10-year delay would mean a target of 550 ppm would be difficult to achieve.”

At levels this high, experts agree that the more drastic impacts of climate change will occur, a point stressed recently by several top global warming experts.

Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Inter governmental panel on Climate Change, speaking to the opening of The United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Poznan last December outlined a laundry list of risks the world faces after a global temperature increase of just a few degrees.

Pachauri stated that a temperature rise of over two degrees Celsius could lead to the extinction of 20 to 30 percent of all species on Earth.

Humanity, according to Pachauri, would face a loss of half of Africa’s agricultural base, up to a half of billion people who depend on water from the Himalayan glaciers would face water shortages, and low-lying coastal areas and islands would be consumed by rising sea leaves.

“If global mean temperature increase is to be stabilized between 2.0-2.4°C, then CO2 emissions must peak by 2015,” stressed Pachauri, who shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC’s groundbreaking reports linking climate change to industrial emissions, and predicting its effects at various levels of emission.

Climate change expert and NASA scientist James Hansen and his wife, Anniek, recently echoed Pachauri in a letter sent to Barack and Michelle Obama before the inauguration. In the letter the Hansens stress that the world has only four years left before inaction will lead to a climate change disaster.

The letter urged the Obamas, “It is still feasible to avert climate disasters, but only if policies are consistent with what science indicates to be required.”

The letter states the safe limits for the greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is “no more than 350 ppm, probably less. Pre-industrial carbon dioxide amount was 280 ppm.”

Current carbon dioxide levels are above 380 ppm and rising at an accelerating pace.

The letter goes on to outline some of the steps recommended for avoiding the worst case scenarios associated with climate change, including a move swiftly away from coal-based electricity generation.

And to an extent, the new Obama administration has shown a willingness to listen, vowing to create a green collar economy with the economic bailout, and reopening the issue of fleet-wide fuel efficiency increases for automakers, a measure long opposed by the Bush administration.

But the problem is a global one, and policy leaders will have to bridge long held differences at the next meeting of the UNCCC to be held later this year in Copenhagen.

The meeting is expected to result in a new climate change treaty to replace to Kyoto Protocol.

“When the world’s leaders meet in Copenhagen in December to agree a global deal on climate change, they will have no excuse for inaction,” said Mr. Leape.

“The world will be watching and expecting those leaders to adopt measures which will lead to a low-carbon economy, giving a fighting chance of keeping climate change below the crucial 2°C level.”

Rebecca Bowe contributed to this report.

GreenNewsToday.org

By Shawn Gaynor

Jan. 22 (GNT) — A newly published study in the journal Nature has reversed a long held belief that Antarctica’s interior is cooling, and found the overall climate of Antarctica is actually warming.

The red areas of the map show areas of the Antarctic that are warming.

Incomplete records of Antarctic climate, especially in interior regions far from research stations, have long been a gap in the data that scientists use to understand global temperature change. But the report released on Jan. 21 by a team of researchers and NASA scientists led by Dr. Eric Steig of the University of Washington shows a warming trend in the Western Antarctic area over the past 50 years.

“In fact, the warming in West Antarctica is greater than the cooling in East Antarctica, meaning that on average the continent has gotten warmer,” said Steig.

“West Antarctica is a very different place than East Antarctica, and there is a physical barrier, the Transantarctic Mountains, that separates the two.”

And this is in part what Steig says has caused previous researchers, with only two inland weather stations in the Eastern Antarctic region, to speculate that the climate of Antarctica was cooling (though warming has long been recognized on the Antarctic Peninsula).

The study found that warming in West Antarctica exceeded one-tenth of a degree Celsius per decade for the last 50 years, similar to temperature rise in other areas of the world.

Steig and his team used satellite data from NASA, and data from Antarctic weather stations to reconstruct a temperature model for the continent.

“People were calculating with their heads instead of actually doing the math,” Steig said. “What we did is interpolate carefully instead of just using the back of an envelope. While other interpolations had been done previously, no one had really taken advantage of the satellite data, which provide crucial information about spatial patterns of temperature change.”

“This study shows that, similar to the other six continents, Antarctica has undergone a significant warming over the past 50 years,” said Dr. Gareth Marshall, a climatologist from the British Antarctic Survey. “The magnitude of this warming is similar to the rest of the Southern Hemisphere, where we believe it is likely that human activity has played some role in the temperature increase (as stated in the last IPCC report) and therefore it is also likely that this is the case regarding an Antarctic warming.”

A hole in the Earth’s ozone layer has long been known to contribute to cooling in the East Antarctic region, but the new study shows that this cooling does not affect the rest of Antarctica.

“In any case, efforts to repair the ozone layer eventually will begin taking effect and the hole could be eliminated by the middle of this century,” Steig pointed out. “If that happens, all of Antarctica could begin warming on a par with the rest of the world.”

While the IPCC has addressed the issue of sea-level rise caused by global warming, previous projections haven’t included what effect Antarctic ice will have on sea levels due to previous gaps in Antarctic climate data.

Many scientists believe melting Antarctic land ice could add several meters to sea levels worldwide.

GreenNewsToday.org

By Shawn Gaynor

Jan. 21 (GNT) – A coalition of environmental groups filed an appeal today against the leasing of federal lands for the construction of LS Power’s White Pine Energy Station.

Photo courtesy of Coal-Is-Dirty.com.

The appeal, filed by Earthjustice on behalf of ten environmental groups, expresses concerns about the White Pine facility’s impacts on human health, climate change, and lowered visibility in the Great Basin National Park in Nevada and Zion National Park in Utah.

By filing the appeal, the groups will challenge a Dec. 22, 2008 decision by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management granting LS Power Group the necessary rights of way to construct a 1,590-megawatt coal-fired power plant on federal lands in eastern Nevada.

“Instead of allowing a huge new dirty coal plant, LS Power and BLM should take the lead from other companies and public agencies that are working to meet electricity demand through energy efficiency and renewables,” said John Barth, an attorney for the groups.

According to the coalition, White Pine would release an estimated 12.88 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year and would also emit significant amounts of other harmful pollutants such as mercury, sulfur dioxide, and fine soot, impairing local air quality and visibility.

The plant would also consume 4.5 million gallons a day of water for cooling in one of the nation’s driest states.

LS Power backed out of building a similar coal plant in Waterloo, Iowa, on Jan. 10, just days after project development partner Dynegy dissolved its partnership with LS Power.

It is unclear how LS Power will raise the capital for the White Pine project after Dynegy’s withdrawal, but Mark Milburn, director of project development for LS Power, announced in a statement that construction of the White Pines facility would proceed.

The White Pine plant is one of three new coal fired power plants proposed for Nevada. The other two facilities — the 1,500-megawatt Ely Energy Center and the 750-megawatt Toquop Energy Project — are also seeking approvals to begin construction.

Dr. Brian Moench, president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, whose group is a party in the appeal, said Utah citizens already suffer poor air quality due to regional coal plants, and that the three new plants proposed for Nevada will only make the air quality worse.

“Yesterday, four of the top five most polluted cities in the country for air quality were in Utah,” said Dr. Moench. “The air pollution was the equivalent of everyone smoking a pack and a half of cigarettes a day, including children and pregnant women. Utah citizens are not going to stand back and allow several new coal plants to make these pollution problems even worse.”

With Obama’s inauguration and Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) poised to take the reigns at the Interior Department, the coalition expressed their hope that the incoming administration will take a different, more environmentally friendly approach to public-land management and energy issues.

“We’re hopeful that the new administration in Washington will act quickly to secure a clean energy future for the United States, and manage our public lands in ways that benefit all Americans,” said Earthjustice attorney Paul Cort.

Nationally, upwards of thirty new coal fired plants are proposed, though tight credit markets may delay or cancel some of those projects.

GreenNewsToday.org

By Shawn Gaynor

Jan. 21 (GNT) – Last Friday the federal Minerals Management Service concluded its final environmental impact statement, giving its approval of the Cape Wind energy project on Horseshoe Shoal off the New England Coast.

Image courtesy of Cape Wind.

With 130 turbines each towering above the ocean on a massive 440 foot tall tower, the project will represent the first industrial-scale offshore wind project in the US once it is completed.

The MMS study concludes seven years of government examination of the project’s impacts, and finds no threat to wildlife in the region.

“This report validates the project will create new jobs, increase energy independence and fight global warming while being a good neighbor to the ecosystem of Nantucket Sound,” said the project’s developer, Jim Gordon.

Now that the project has cleared this regulatory hurdle, government leasing for the project should begin in the next 30 days.

The turbines of the Cape Wind project will be capable of generating up to 420 megawatts of renewable electricity — enough to meet the energy needs of 420,000 homes. The project is expected to produce an average of 170 megawatts of electricity at any given time, about 75 percent of the average electricity demand for Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket island combined.

The switch to wind power will reduce the area’s carbon-dioxide emissions by an estimated 880,000 tones per year, the same amount produced by roughly 175,000 cars.

The new project will also reduce reliance on the area’s current power plant, the Mirant Canal Generating Plant, a bunker fuel fired station which has been at the center of two major oil spills.

On Dec. 15, 1976 the tanker Argo spilled 7.7 million gallons of oil after running aground southeast of Nantucket. In April of 2003, 98,000 gallons of oil was spilled after a Bouchard Company fuel barge ran aground in route to the Mirant Canal Generating Plant. That spill shutdown 100,000 acres of shell fishing beds.

But the project has had some heavy local resistance, from residents who say the windmills being in view of shore-side communities will ruin the area’s tourist industry.

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), has long opposed the project, and responded to the report in a statement writing, “I do not believe that this action by the Interior Department will be sustained. By taking this action, the Interior Department has virtually assured years of continued public conflict and contentious litigation.”

The project has seen a warm reception from many environmental groups who have criticized the length of the review process.

“We are excited to finally see a first-of-its-kind, utility-scale offshore wind project powering American homes and businesses. This facility shows we can repower America, and we can start today,” stated Nathanael Greene, senior energy policy specialist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“After more than seven years of state and federal review — much longer than a traditional coal power plant is ever reviewed — Cape Wind has proven that its benefits will far outweigh its impacts.”

The project could cause tensions for the Obama administration as one of the president’s most championed issues lines him up against one of his strongest allies in the Senate.

GreenNewsToday.org

Jan. 15 (GNT) – Lisa Jackson, Barack Obama’s choice to head the Environmental Protection Agency, seemed on her way to a smooth confirmation yesterday as she appeared for hearings before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Lisa Jackson, Barrack Obama's choice to head the EPA. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia.

Ms. Jackson, 46, who has worked as a career employee at EPA 15 years, most recently served as head of New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection. Jackson’s committee hearing lasted more than four hours.

Signaling her support for Jackson in the opening statement of the hearing, committee chair Sen. Barbra Boxer (D-CA) railed against the Bush administration’s approach to the EPA, saying, “the EPA must rely on scientists, not special interests. The EPA needs to be woken up from its deep and nightmarish sleep. With new leadership, I am confident we can wake up EPA.”

Its was a theme repeated throughout the hearing. Responding to concerns from Senators in both parties that the EPA had become politically driving and unresponsive to legislators and the public, Jackson repeatedly assured the committee that science and the rule of law would be the guiding principal at EPA.

The committee members outlined in great length what they believed have been failed policies on issues ranging from global warming to EPA’s inability to regulate levels of perchlorate pollution in drinking water, and urged quick action be taken to restore their own and the public’s faith in the EPA.

Extracting Jackson’s commitment to review topics from the defeated California Tailpipe Emissions Standards, to the cleanup of uranium mining sites on the Navaho reservation, senators ticked off a laundry list of the nation’s most impacted sites.

Jackson was confronted about transparency at the EPA by Sen. Klouchar (D-MN), who criticized the EPA under the Bush administration for lacking transparency and hiding scientific evidence. Sen. Klouchar pressed the issue and asked Jackson for her own ideas to restore the public faith in the EPA.

“As far as transparency, the president-elect has made it clear that he has an unprecedented level of commitment to transparency in government, and to opening the doors of government and government decision-making,” stated Jackson. “If I am confirmed I would be proud to uphold the president elect’s commitment on my part. I would make sure the staff understands the committment to transparency as well.”

When asked to outline her views on climate change, Jackson replied, “We know that manmade emissions are contributing to climate change, and we know these conditions are worsening. Time is not our friend in this matter. CO2 lasts in our atmosphere for decades — sometimes longer.”

Jackson continued, “There is a need to act… Not only for our country but for the world, which has been waiting for our leadership on this issue.”

One of the most pressing issues facing Ms. Jackson was broached by Sen. Merkley of Oregon, who inquired about the EPA’s defeat of the California tailpipe emissions standards, which were adopted by Oregon and several other states.

In December of 2007, the EPA prevented California tailpipe emissions standards from being adopted by refusing to grant waivers under the Clean Air Act for California to regulate carbon emissions from vehicles.

Current EPA administrator Stephen Johnson overruled the opinion of the agency’s legal and technical staff and rejected California’s request, a move criticized by many as politically, not scientifically, motivated.

The California emissions standards had called for a cut tailpipe emissions by 30 percent by 2016.

In response to Sen. Merkley’s concerns, Jackson promised a review of the issue and stated she would “let science be the guide in making the determination, and let the rule of law.”

Ms. Jackson, latter answering a question by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) said she was committed to personally visiting uranium mining sites on the Navajo Reservation, but cautioned about what progress could be made. “The scope of the problem is such that progress will have to be incremental.”

Sen. Udall responded characterizing the issues of pollution on the Navajo reservation as issues of environmental justice, calling the situation a tragedy and disaster.

Jackson has faced criticism from some corners about her tenure as head of the EPA in New Jersey, but faced few questions about her time in that role.

She closed the hearing stating, “If I am confirmed, I will continue to do that which I have always prided myself on. I would never claim that we’re perfect, but I believe that New Jersey’s environment is better off because of my tenure there. I would like to be able to say that at the EPA, that the country is better off because of my tenure there.”

Source: GreenNewsToday.org