Environmentalist already are criticizing a plan by President Obama, announced today, to allow oil and gas drilling off the shore of Virginia and possibly other East Coast states.

The president said the drilling would be part of an overall plan to reduce the country's dependence on foreign fuel in favor of renewable energy and domestic sources.

He called it a "tough" decision. It seems that he is trying to win favor from Republicans for his climate change bill, which include a cap-and-trade scheme to reduce climate warming emissions that they don't like. Read the Associated Press story here.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation has joined other conservation organizations in saying this is bad policy.

In a statement, the bay foundation said the coastline of Virginia represents the "largest, most intact coastal wilderness on the East Coast" and has won several designations including as a UN International Biosphere Reserve and a U.S. Department of the Interior National Natural Landmark.

The foudation president, Will Baker, said: “Off shore drilling creates a new pollution source, one capable of significant, even devastating environmental damage from drilling, transportation, storage or refinement. Taken together, the totality of the potential harm is too great a risk for the Chesapeake Bay, which EPA already officially lists as impaired.”

He cited Obama's executive order last year for a national strategy to clean up pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. Obama called the bay one of this nation’s priority waters. That, he said, is incompatible with drilling offshore because that ocean water flushes the bay.

He, as other groups, said the nation ought to focus more on renewable energy like solar and wind, including offshore wind power.  

The ocean conservation group Oceana also challenged the notion that drilling is needed to support jobs. It cited a University of Massachusetts Political Economy Research Institute’s study that said for every $1 million of U.S. investment in clean technology -- such as wind, solar, smart grid work and building retrofits -- three times as many jobs are created than if the same amount were invested in the oil and gas industry. See the study here. 

So, do you think this is not a bad compromise? A necessary compromise with pro-drilling forces who could derail Obama's larger energy policy? Or are you disappointed with this decision?

AP file photo of offshore platform

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Chesapeake Bay
        

Pass on the store bought egg coloring kits this holiday, and try your hand at using natural dyes to make beautifully colored Easter eggs. Most likely, you already have the ingredients you need in your kitchen pantry of fridge. Here’s what you need for the following colors:

Yellow:
•1 teaspoon saffron
•3 tablespoons ground turmeric

Pink:
•1 bunch sliced beets
•Bottled beet juice
•Frozen cherries

Green:
•1 bunch chopped spinach
•Petals from 8 marigold flowers

Lavender:
•Grape juice
•2 bags frozen blueberries

Blue:
•1 head chopped red cabbage

Once you’ve chosen your colors, mix the appropriate ingredients into a pan of cold water (enough to just cover the eggs). Add a tablespoon of vinegar, cover the pan and bring it to a boil. Simmer for 15-20 minutes and allow the water to cool before removing the eggs.

For added texture, slice a fresh beet and roll it over the surface of your eggs to create an interesting pattern (see the striped egg in the upper right hand corner of the picture). Blot with a towel to remove excess juice.

Image and recipes courtesy of Eating Out Loud.

Posted by Christy Zuccarini at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
        

This is from the Picture of Health blog. The sites have already been chosen -- schools, day cares and some homes -- but perhaps it's good that the city isn't using a bunch of pesticide so close to all those kids? Perhaps more people will try non-chemical answers first ...

If you live in Baltimore, you also happen to live with plenty of pests. I don't know many people who have managed to avoid a roach or mice infestation from time to time. And in getting rid of them, many rely on toxic pest control sprays.

The Baltimore City Health Department aims to offer residents some relief -- in a less hazardous way. The department received a $250,000 grant from the Environmental Protection Agency to fund less-toxic pest control strategies for city homes, schools and businesses.

Called the Safe Pest Management for Health Initiative, the program aims to reduce the use of toxic pesticides in favor of a concept called integrated pest management, which is less harmful and more environmentally sensitive, according to health officials.

The strategy relies on preventive measures first – such as sealing cracks and properly storing food – continuing with less hazardous pest control options, if needed. A pilot program started last year in a city public housing development decreased cockroach infestation by 97 percent, health department officials said.

About 5,450 residents and government workers will be trained in the program, which over the next two years, will be rolled out to 100,000 residents with a goal of decreasing toxic aerosol pesticides by 75 percent.

Baltimore Sun file photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: News
        

Baltimore city officials are warning that budget cuts may force them to scale back efforts to keep trash out of local streams and the harbor.

In today's Baltimore Sun, City Hall reporter Julie Scharper quotes Public Works Director David E. Scott saying that under the pared-down preliminary budget recently presented by Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, his department would stop maintaining nets and booms across local streams -- like the one pictured above --that keep trash out of the harbor. The department also would have to cut back on the frequency with which it cleans out storm drains, sweeps streets and picks up bulk trash, he said.

Scott told the Board of Estimates that the administration is considering proposing a storm-water charge to help pay for cleaning and maintaining the city's waterways. According to the story, the public works director said many municipalities levy such a fee. That may be true elsewhere, but not in Maryland, where only a handfull of counties and municipalities have taken the plunge. A bill in Annapolis to require all the state's localities to charge such fees - earmarked for keeping local waterways clean - appears to be bottled up in committee.

Cutting back on efforts to keep debris out of the harbor could get the city in hot water. The Environmental Protection Agency has declared the harbor "impaired" (aka polluted) by trash, and the city is expected to come up with a plan for ridding its waterways of unsightly and unhealthy litter.

City taxpayers are encouraged to voice their opinions about these and other proposed budget cuts at a meeting April 7.  The mayor has said she'll unveil an alternative budget on April 12 that proposes to shrink the cutbacks with $50 million in new taxes and fees - presumably including the storm-water charge. 

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
        

It's that time of year again. Spring is upon us. Get out the gloves and the bags and help clean up the city.

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake’s Spring Cleanup will happen Saturday, April 17, from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. Go outside and pick up some litter, clean an alley or get together with neighbors for a project.

City officials say community representatives should register now by calling 311. They'll bring containers for debris on a first-call basis. There won't be trucks available, but if you bag and stack the garbage at a designated location, the city will come by and pick it up on Monday, April 19 -- let the city know when you register where that site will be.

The Bureau of Solid Waste will also loan other supplies and tools. Have your community leaders ask about those, too.

Baltimore Sun file photo of the 2009 cleanup in Reservoir Hill

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

This week, I'm not highlighting a specific recipe, though here's a link to The Sun's collection of lentil recipes (be warned: some incorporate meat). Instead, I wanted to bring your attention to an Associated Press article about the renewed attention on lentils.

Here's an excerpt: Lentils are a hot topic among gourmets these days, with recipes for them popping up in most major food magazines.

Lentil and other legume farmers hope to capitalize on this interest and convince consumers and food producers to use them in breads and cookies as well as the more traditional soups and stews.

To do this, they've formed a new marketing venture aimed at promoting the health and other benefits of lentils, dry peas, garbanzo beans and other so-called "pulse" crops. "They're barking up the right tree," said Brad Barnes, associate dean of culinary education at The Culinary Institute of America.

Growing interest in Indian and other international cuisines, along with greater awareness of intolerance to gluten, a protein found in many grains, have fostered an interest in lentils and legumes, Barnes and others said. A general push toward eating healthier also has made high-fiber, high-protein, low-fat legumes more appealing, said Tina Ujlaki, executive food editor at Food and Wine magazine.

Have you baked with lentils? How did it turn out? If you have a favorite lentil recipe share a link in the comments.

AP Photo/Larry Crowe

Posted by Kim Walker at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Food
        

A coalition of 200 public health and environmental groups plan to rally outside of a conference of chemical execs Tuesday to draw attention to the issue of harmful chemicals in everyday products. 
 
The rally is slated for noon at the Pier Six Pavilion in the Inner Harbor, outside the hotel where the GlobalChem conference is happening.

The groups want the companies to adhere to some tougher rules and agree to more reporting about chemicals. Congress is about to consider  updating the Toxic Substances Control Act, which governs the chemicals and hasn't been updated since 1976.

The groups formed an organization called Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families to call for:

1) Safety information on all chemicals in use. The group says the chemical industry wants to prioritize just a few;

2) Reduction of the most dangerous chemicals now. The group says the industry wants more testing; and

3) Real-world analysis of chemical exposures to inform safety decisions. The group says now the law works as if people are exposed to one chemical and one source at a time.  
 
The group says the law now requires the Environmental Protection Agency to only test a few hundred of the 80,000 chemicals now in use. But they say health problems such as autism, cancer and reproductive disorders are linked to these chemicals and are on the rise.

Maryland PIRG, one of the lead organizations in the group, has been working to get harmful chemicals out of products, such as BPA in baby bottles and the flame retardant DecaBDE.  

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

Earth Hour is upon us again. At 8:30 p.m. local time on Saturday (March 27), people around the world will be turning off their lights for an hour as a show of support for taking action on climate change.  Will you be one of them?

Begun in 2007 in Australia, the global demonstration is organized by the World Wildlife Fund, which says nearly a billion people joined in last year.  Iconic structures like the Eiffel Tower in Paris, Sydney’s Opera House, the Great Pyramids of Gaza and New York’s Empire State Building go dark for an hour.  As the time-lapse footage above of Shanghai shows, lights even get turned out in China, which now emits more climate-altering carbon dioxide than the United States.

Here in Baltimore, the lights will go out at City Hall and six nearby municipal buildings for an hour.  Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake issued a press release encouraging residents and businesses to join the effort, noting that energy conservation is a money saver as well as a help for the climate. The average Baltimore home could save $250 a year by trimming its energy consumption 15 percent, she points out.

Is anyone else turning out their lights for Earth Hour?  Videos of the event are being uploaded here on YouTube.   And for the Twitterati, the hashtag is '#earthhour'

Update: The lights are going out in Annapolis, too, at the State House and the governor's mansion. Gov. Martin O'Malley also issued a call for all Marylanders to join in. There's a Web page here where Maryland residents can register their support and see who else is participating. And there's also a blog here dedicated to Earth Hour activities in B'more.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 11:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (10)
        

Did you know that $1 out of every $11 you spend at the store, you spend on packaging you just throw away when you get home? Stop by the Whole Foods in Mt. Washington on April 11 and participate in Green Living Expert Diane MacEachern’s Trash-less Family Workshop to get the inside scoop on at least ten easy ways your family can trash less, save more, and feel great about being green. The workshop begins at 11 a.m.

Living a more environmentally friendly lifestyle is a real shortcut to saving money. Four simple green steps will save you $10 a day. And that's just the beginning. At 11:30, Ms. MacEachern’s Save $4,000/Year Going Green Workshop will showcase hidden opportunities that give your budget a breather while helping you be as eco as you want.

Attendees of each workshop will be entered to win a free autographed copy of the Big Green Purse:Use Your Spending Power to Create a Cleaner, Greener World.

Snacks will be provided and a booksigning will take place from noon-1 p.m.

About the Author

Diane MacEachern, is an award-winning entrepreneur and green expert who was recently named one of America's EcoHeroes by Glamour Magazine. When she is not blogging at www.dianesbiggreenpurse.com or talking green on Martha Stewart Living radio or Fox News, she might be providing advice, consumer guidance and workshops for many companies.

Both workshops are free, but seating is limited. Pregister at Customer Service or email molly.kushner@wholefoods.com.

Posted by Christy Zuccarini at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

Do we eat too much food without thinking about where it comes from?

The animal rights group Compassion Over Killing is trying to draw some attention to the issue and, at the same time, bring more vegan offerings to Baltimore. It's got some things planned:

COK is joining with Emily's Cafe and Deserts, at 4901 Springarden Dr. in north Baltimore, this Sunday from 9 a.m.-2 p.m. in a benefit and free movie event. A portion of your breakfast or lunch bill will be donated to the group's efforts. The movie is Chicken Run.

Beforehand, from 10:30 a.m.-11:30 a.m. COK is also hosting a "Dunkin' Cruelty Feed-In." They will ask Dunkin' Donuts at 25 Light Street to stop using milk and egg products. RSVP for this at info@cok.net or 301-891-2458.

Also, the group is working with other restaurants to up the number of vegan menu offering. One such place is Pizzazz Tuscan Grille, at 711 Eastern Ave. inside the Pier Five hotel. It's expanded its menu and is hosting an event on April 9 from 7 p.m.-10 p.m. to show it off and raise money for COK's efforts. The restaurant is offering 20 percent of your bill -- plus all the tips earned by our a COK bartender. Drink specials will include $5 martinis and two-for-one drinks.

Anyone been to these place? Enjoyed vegan offerings? Think Baltimore has good vegan, or vegetarian, options?

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)
Categories: Events, Food
        

In another step to salvage the struggling oyster population in the Chesapeake Bay, a nonprofit group announced today that is has partnered with area restaurants, caterers and others to collect the shells and reuse them.
The users will hand over buckets of their empty shells to the Oyster Recovery Partnership, which will clean them, fill them with new oyster larvae called spat and place them back in the bay about a year later.
“For every oyster you enjoy, we can put back 10,” said Stephan Abel, executive director of the partnership, during a press conference at the Oceanaire restaurant in Harbor East. “Every shell counts.”
That restaurant is one of 21 restaurants and caterers participating in the program, which launched about 16 months ago as a pilot and Thursday officially became the Oyster Shell Recycling Alliance.
Maryland once supplied the world with oysters, but last year produced less than 200,000 bushels, or about 1 percent of the amount collected in the heyday more than a century ago.
The Oyster Recovery Partnership is working with the state and federal agencies, the University of Maryland, volunteers, watermen and others to bolster the population by creating recovery areas where oysters can repopulate naturally. And, now, these shells will be added to the effort.
The oysters, the partnership says, serve many purposes in the bay. They provide food, habitat for other marine life, jobs and filtration for the waters.

If you’re looking to patronize a restaurant or caterer that participates, so far they include: Boatyard Bar & Grill, Federal House McGarvey’s Saloon, Middleton’s Tavern and Rams Head Tavern in Annapolis; Atlantic Catering, Bob’s Seafood, Cafe Hon, Harbor Court Hotel, Nick’s Cross Street, Nick’s Fish House, Mama’s on the Half Shell, McCormick & Schmick, Michael’s Eight Avenue, Oceanaire, Ocean Pride, Phillips Seafood, Ryleighs and Woodberry Kitchen in Baltimore; and W.H. Harris Seafood and Old Ebbitt Grill in Washington.
For more information, got to www.oysterrecovery.org.

Photo courtesy of Erika Norteman

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Chesapeake Bay
        

Three years ago, Maryland lawmakers unanimously approved a law requiring developers to do more to keep rain water on their building sites and prevent it from washing pollution into nearby streams.  Passage of the "Storm Water Management Act of 2007" was hailed at the time as a landmark achievement in the long-running struggle to restore the Chesapeake Bay, as studies show polluted runoff from developed land is a significant and growing threat to water quality in the state.

Now, it seems at least some legislators are having second thoughts about how quickly developers should be required to comply, and how much they should have to do if they're redeveloping land previously built upon. A House committee held a hearing Wednesday on a bill, HB1125, that would grant some development projects breaks from the new pollution-control rules, which take effect May 4. 

Legislators' qualms are prompted by a full-court press from developers and local officials, who complain that the state's rules for carrying out the law are unreasonably stringent and could cost construction jobs and tax revenues at a time when Maryland's economy is struggling.

The issue has split the state's environmental groups, with some - notably the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and 1000 Friends of Maryland - backing a deal struck two weeks ago to "grandfather" some development projects already in the works and to ease requirements for redevelopment projects to control the amount of storm-water runoff from their land. 

But leaders of those two groups were involved in the closed-door negotiations with builders and local officials that lead to the deal. A bevy of other environmental advocates who weren't in the room are voicing outrage over the concessions and demanding no compromises.  They held a press conference at the State House on Wednesday to denounce what former U.S. Sen. Joseph Tydings called the "dirty water bill."  The protest included former Gov. Harry Hughes (seen at left), former Rep. Wayne Gilchrest and former state Sen. Gerald Winegrad.

"It's like deja vu all over again," said Winegrad, an Annapolis Democrat who recalled that developers howled in the early 1980s when he sponsored the state's first law attempting to control storm-water from building sites.  The inadequacy of that law was what prompted environmental advocates to push for strengthening it in 2007, he said.  But before it passed, that legislation was "eviscerated," Winegrad contended, weakening its original requirement that runoff from developed land be no different than what it was before construction started.

"Enough is enough," he exhorted at the press conference.  "The compromise was not a good compromise....This is outrageous.  This is an environmental outrage.  Let's stop it now."

Later, at the House hearing on the bill to revise the 2007 storm-water law, it got a little muddy just what everyone was arguing about.  Environment Secretary Shari T. Wilson testified that her department had already issued guidance clarifying its rules and giving local officials flexibility to ease pollution-control requirements on some development and redevelopment projects. 

And as part of the agreement struck two weeks ago, her agency also had proposed emergency changes to its rules spelling out essentially the same things.  But Wilson volunteered to lawmakers that she was fine with the bill, too, since its provisions mirrored how her department proposed to enforce the law.

The bill's sponsor, Del. Marvin Holmes, a Prince George's County Democrat, likewise said his legislation - originally granting breaks to a variety of development projects - had been rewritten to dovetail with the department's guidance.  He suggested that environmentalists critical of the bill hadn't read the latest language - indeed, it wasn't generally available at the time of the hearing.

No one else was allowed to testify at the hearing.  The panel's chairwoman, Del. Maggie L. McIntosh, (pictured at left) had previously declared that with time growing short to act on legislation, only bill sponsors would be allowed to speak.  She refused to let Tydings speak and told him and his supporters to sit down when he called on them to stand to demonstrate their disapproval of the bill.

Outside the hearing room, Diane Cameron with the Audubon Naturalist Society wasn't ready to concede that there was nothing left to fight about if the state environment department had already issued guidelines granting builders the same breaks that the legislation would provide.  She complained that she hadn't had a chance to read the bill, but she said she suspected it would significantly narrow the scope of the law and rules.

"Why do they need to enact legislation if all they're doing is issuing guidance?" she asked. 

Michael Powell, a lawyer/lobbyist representing developers, said that while the agency's guidelines addressed their concerns, the builders wanted legislative or regulatory changes because those would spell out more clearly how the new pollution-control rules would be applied. They didn't want to have to guess, he said, whether their projects might or might not qualify for waivers from the new requirements.

"One thing developers need is certainty," Powell said. (Of course, what the lawyer didn't mention is that by having their breaks spelled out in law or regulations, it would be easier to go to court if they feel they're being unfairly denied.)

Kim Coble, Maryland director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said her group stood by its support of the deal struck two weeks ago, arguing that it actually put limits on the breaks builders would get, which weren't spelled out in the original rules or administration guidelines.  Builders with projects that already have preliminary approval from local planning agencies can proceed under the state's old pollution-control rules, for instance, as long as they start construction by 2017.

But environmental critics suggested that the foundation and the O'Malley administration had been pressured by McIntosh into agreeing to unwarranted concessions that could delay and weaken the push to rein in polluted runoff.

The Baltimore city Democrat, though, insisted she had engineered the behind-the-scenes deal two weeks ago in an attempt to avoid a legislative struggle over the storm-water rules.  She denied twisting anyone's arm, and insisted that the breaks offered developers would be limited and monitored to ensure they aren't abused. 

McIntosh said she plans to ask her committee to vote by week's end on sending the bill to the House floor.  Should it pass the House, its fate in the Senate is uncertain with only two weeks remaining in the legislative session.  Sen. Paul Pinsky, another Prince George's Democrat, has already held up action on the environment department's proposal to make emergency changes to its rules. 

"Nobody wanted this," a frustrated McIntosh said, referring to having the legislature change the law to specify breaks for developers that the administration already had said the law and its regulations permit. "Is it needed?  I contend not." But amid the heated rhetoric and rumors swirling in Annapolis, she added, "nobody trusts anything.  So, yeah, I'm moving a bill."

(Baltimore Sun file photos by Glenn Fawcett and Monica Lopossay)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
        

Can the Chesapeake Bay be saved? If so, at what cost? What will we have to pay, and how much will we have to change in how we live, work and play? Do we care enough to do what's needed?

Those are the questions that keep playing over in my mind as I report on what many are calling a watershed year for North America's largest estuary.

After nearly three decades of trying, the multibillion-dollar effort to restore the Chesapeake has shown frustratingly little progress. An "immense protein factory" in H.L. Mencken's day, the bay's seafood bounty has dwindled amid "dead zones" that make it hard for oysters, crabs and fish to thrive. And it's not fit for humans to swim in some places, like Baltimore's harbor.

It's not all gloom and doom, though. Scientists say there are places around the bay where water quality is showing improvement. And there's a renewed push from the federal government and from state houses to ratchet up the cleanup efforts to build on those positive signs.

But that push comes at a time when recession has drained government coffers, making it hard to talk about spending more on saving the bay.  And there's pushback from farmers, developers and others being asked to do more or different to help.

So it's timely that on Saturday, there'll be a public forum in Annapolis looking at the choices we have for the future of the Chesapeake. Sponsored by the Annapolis Capital newspaper, "The Bay at a Crossroads" will feature state and federal environmental officials, including Maryland Environment Secretary Shari Wilson and the Environmental Protection Agency's bay "czar," Chuck Fox. Also speaking will be environmental advocates, including political scientist Howard Ernst, author of "Fight for the Bay."

You can read a great summary here of the bay's predicament and what's being done about it, by The Capital's Pamela Wood.

The forum begins at 10 a.m. It's at the Maryland Hall for the Creative Arts, 801 Chase Street in Annapolis.  For directions and parking, go here. 

(Baltimore Sun file photo by Kenneth K. Lam)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Events
        

PBS is looking for creative kids and young inventors ages 5-19 to celebrate the 40th anniversary of Earth Day this April by participating in the 2010 Trash to Treasure competition. This award-winning series challenges contestants to recycle, reuse, and re-engineer everyday materials into new inventions. Three young innovators will win a trip to Boston to see their designs built and have the process chronicled for an upcoming episode of PBS KIDS GO!.

According to Design Squad executive producer Marisa Wolsky, "This is an opportunity for kids to give a second life to an object they or their household would have otherwise discarded. We expect that this year's entries will run the gamut, from trying to fill a pressing societal need to offering something whimsical and fun."

The rules are simple. The invention should fit within one of the three categories: move things or people (Mobility), protect the environment (Environmental), or be used for indoor or outdoor play (Play). The invention also needs to be made of at least two repurposed materials (such as fabric, paper, plastic, small electronics, wheels, clamps, springs, batteries, hardware, wood, bike parts, string, rubber bands, cardboard, kitchen gadgets, etc.) Kids will be given online tools to sketch out their ideas or upload a photo. (Kids don't need to actually build their invention in order to enter.)

Last year's winner, Max Wallack, 13, inventor of the "Home Dome"--a temporary shelter for homeless people and disaster victims ---gives this advice to this year's entrants, "Identify a problem and then try to come up with a solution to it. Be prepared to make several attempts at designing before one design jumps out as the right one."

The nationwide contest is open for ages 5-19 and will launch online on April 5. Entries will be accepted through September 5, 2010 at PBSKIDSGO.org/designsquad/contest.

Posted by Christy Zuccarini at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
        

According to a new report released today, the state of Maryland spent at least $200,000 on bottled water last year.

The report, called Getting States Off the Bottle, was released by Corporate Accountability International, a membership nonprofit that calls out corporations on their "irresponsible and dangerous" actions.

The group says water bottling companies scare the public into drinking only bottle water that fouls the environment and burdens the budget. But in about 44 percent of cases, bottle water is tap water. At the same time state and local governments are buying into the companies' PR campaign that local tap water is unsafe, the governments are failing to invest in proper upkeep of water infrastructure, the report says.

The report authors have taken a look at state bottled water expenditures -- though a real look is tough because a lot of the water purchases are hard to track. This is the second installment of the report and includes five states. Maryland is one. The others are Minnesota, Colorado, New Mexico and Oregon. The range of spending was between $78,000 and $475,000 during fiscal '09. 

“Plastic water bottles are a major contributer to waste in our stream, rivers, and bay.” said Mary Roby, executive director of Herring Run Watershed Association, in a statement. She participated in an event to draw attention to the bottled water today in Druid Hill Park. She and others called on Gov. O'Malley to cancel state spending on bottled water.

Supporters say more than 100 cities and three states (Illinios, Virginia and New York) already have cut spending on bottled water or upped their contribution to public water. 

Corporate Accountability International says officials in Gov. O’Malley’s office have said they will  work on reducing spending on bottled water and continue to invest in public water. Already the state has funnelled $119 million in stimulus money to water quality and drinking water projects in the state. The group says public water systems across the country need about $22 billion in investment.

The group also wants other public workers -- and the public -- to cut bottled water use in non-emergency situations. Officials there say surveys show a third of people who had switched to bottled water have recently switched back.

Are you one of them?

MCT file photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: News
        

Want to know how to get from Here to There on a bike? Google has partnered with the Rails-to- Trails Conservancy people to map it all out for you.

If you go to maps.google.com, click on directions and choose "bicycling." You can also get directions for walking, public transportation or by car.

It's a pretty nifty feature. You get line by line directions and a map, as well as estimated mileage and time spent on each leg.

If you want more info on trails, go to www.traillink.com, a conservancy site that is interactive. You can add trails and pictures.

The conservancy is the group that works to turn old railroad lines into hiking and biking trails, and has offered Google access to its database of 15,000 miles of trails.

Someone give it a go and let us know how it works.

Google sample map

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Tips
        

Residents of homes built atop eroding cliffs overlooking Chesapeake Bay in Calvert County are pressing federal, state and local officials to ease legal protections for an endangered beetle so that they can try to shore up the crumbling bluffs before their homes tumble onto the beach below.

It's a "tough situation," as Leo Miranda-Castro, supervisor of the Chesapeake Bay field office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service put it. I wrote about it in The Baltimore Sun today, and you can find more here. There's a hearing in Annapolis today on legislation dealing with the dilemma.

There are only about 5,000 Puritan tiger beetles in Maryland, though their numbers fluctuate quite a bit from year to year. Their habitat is limited to the bare sand and clay of Calvert's cliffs, and similar bluffs on the Sassafras River on the Eastern Shore. There's also a small population along the Connecticut River in New England.

Federal and state laws prohibit doing anything to harm threatened and endangered species, but officials acknowledge the laws weren't intended to put humans at risk in the process. Those cliffs also are home to hundreds of people who live in homes built atop the bluffs - many of them built decades ago The dwellings have been getting closer to the edge every year as the waves chew away at the base of the cliffs and chunks of the tops break loose and slide to the beach. Some, like Marcia Seifert's pictured at left, are within 10 or 20 feet of the brink now, and though the average erosion rate is said to be two feet a year, the losses have been coming in bigger chunks lately for some properties.

The residents I spoke with say they knew the cliffs were eroding when they bought there, but not that there were rare beetles there that would hamper their ability to take steps to slow or halt the erosion. The county has required at least a 100-foot setback from the edge for any homes built after 1984, though it has allowed some to be put closer to the edge if the owner signs a waiver absolving the county of any liability. But there is no local or state law, it seems, requiring sellers of property to disclose the existence of endangered species.

Federal and state officials have refused to permit residents to place stone revetments or build walls against the cliffs, which they say would make them uninhabitable by the beetles. They have allowed some residents like Seifert and her housemate to place large boulders or concrete structures just offshore to break up waves before they can hit the toe of the cliff.  But those measures haven't halted the erosion, and residents say they need to do something more, or be forced to abandon their homes before long.

It's not clear what, if anything, can be done that won't affect the beetles - or that will truly succeed in halting the erosion. Residents have hired an engineer who's working on a plan to "pin" the cliffs in place, but officials say it can't cover up all the bare sand and clay that the beetles need. They're working with the engineer for now and reserving judgment on the new plan until they see a final proposal. It's also not clear if the residents can afford to try the new remedy, since by some estimates it could cost $2,000 or more per foot of shoreline.

Halting or at least slowing the cliffs' erosion might have been more feasible if started earlier, when houses weren't as close to the edge. Many fault federal and state officials for not grappling with this sooner, but at least one resident acknowledges he and his neighbors also were slow to come together to seek help for the community as a whole.  Trying to shore up one threatened house at a time is becoming increasingly difficult, as regulators worry about the cumulative impact on the beetles - and that it also risks worsening erosion of neighboring properties.

“In hindsight, our stewardship was lacking,” says Anthony Vajda, a retired manager with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. “We all have some blame to share. The point is, where do we go from here?”

(Baltimore Sun photo by Barbara Haddock Taylor; beetle photo courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
        

Cacique sent in some meatless recipes featuring their cheese and crema products, which can be found at WalMart, Safeway and other stores. The Pumpkin Pasta with Pepitas looked intriguing, but I doubt canned pumpkin is widely available right now. So you may want to give Quiche with a Kick a try instead.

Quiche with a Kick

 Servings: 12

1 cup Cacique Monterey Jack shredded

 1/4 cup cilantro (fresh) chopped

1/4 tsp cracked black pepper

2 eggs

1/4 cup milk

1/2 cup red bell pepper diced

1/2 cup red onion diced

1 tsp salt

1 jalapeno pepper diced

1 1/4 cup liquid egg substitute cooking spray (non-stick)

1 whole wheat pie crust (frozen)*

2 tsp chili powder

Heat oven to 350 degrees. Prepare a medium-sized skillet with nonstick cooking spray. Sautee peppers, onions and diced jalapeno over medium heat until softened, about 8 minutes. Scrape sautéed vegetables into prepared pie crust. Reserve. Whisk egg substitute, eggs, and milk until frothy. Stir in salt, chili powder, pepper, and cheese. Pour egg mixture over vegetables in pie crust. Bake until top is lightly browned and set, about 50 minutes. Cool 10 minutes, top with chopped cilantro, and serve. *A whole wheat pie crust is available in the freezer section at natural food stores and some large grocery stores.

Recipe and photo courtesy of Cacique.

If this dish doesn't appeal, search our recipes database for other meatless options. As always, if you give this recipe a try, tell us about it in the comments. Or e-mail us your favorite meatless recipe to share.

Posted by baltimoresun.com at 11:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Food
        

It looks like there could be a legislative showdown after all over Maryland's new storm-water pollution rules. Del. Maggie McIntosh, the Baltimore Democrat who heads the House Environmental Matters Committee, has revived a bill that would grant developers some breaks from the stringent regulations.

HB1125 is scheduled to be heard by McIntosh's committee at 2 p.m. Wednesday, March 24.  It would exempt from the new rules an unknown number of developments that are already in the works, while easing requirements on redevelopment projects. Only the bill's sponsors are to be allowed to testify, though others can submit written comments. 

McIntosh had cancelled a hearing on the bill after getting builders, local officials and some environmentalists to agree on changes to the rules that would avoid what promised to be a bitter legislative debate.  Builders had complained that the rules would impose huge costs on projects already in the planning pipeline. They and local officials also voiced concerns the rules would make redevelopment less feasible, undermining the state's Smart Growth efforts.  But environmentalists countered that the rules were not that onerous and opposed any delays or weakening, arguing that runoff from developed land is a growing threat to the Chesapeake Bay.

The Maryland Department of the Environment last week proposed emergency regulations to bring its storm-water rules in line with the agreement, which granted builders most of what they sought.  Some environmentalists agreed to the compromise, saying they feared lawmakers might make even greater rollbacks if legislation went forward. 

But Sen. Paul G. Pinsky, presiding chairman of the House-Senate committee that reviews regulations, has objected to the deal and demanded answers to a series of questions about MDE's proposed rules changes. 

The Prince George's County Democrat could threaten the deal if his joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review blocks MDE from making changes to the rules by May 4, when the storm-water regulations take effect. 

The panel can't veto regulations outright, but it can stop attempts to speed their enactment as "emergency" rules, as MDE had proposed.  To go back and make the changes following standard regulatory procedures would require months of public notice and comment, meaning they couldn't be finalized until after the storm-water rules to which developers object have already taken effect. 

McIntosh had said she would dust off the storm-water bill if anything threatened to block or delay the agreed-upon changes.  That would suit just fine those environmentalists who were not part of the talks that lead to the deal. They've been critical of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and others who agreed to the compromise.

So this sets up a potential duel between two of the General Assembly's greener legislators - McIntosh and Pinsky.  As part of the House leadership, McIntosh helped push through 2007 legislation to tighten storm-water controls.  But she now fears the state's rules go too far and could inadvertently undermine efforts to promote redevelopment of Baltimore and other urban areas.  Pinsky sides with those environmentalists who oppose any weakening of the rules and contends the Senate would never agree to them, even if the House did. 

With a renewed lobbying battle in Annapolis looming, builders on Thursday released a report projecting that the state's storm-water rules, if unchanged, could cost nearly 8,000 construction jobs and reduce state and local tax revenues by $50 million at a time when Maryland and the rest of the country are struggling with high unemployment and government budget crises because of recession-driven dips in tax revenues.

The Bay Foundation, though a backer of the compromise to change the regulations, disputed the report.  The environmental group released a statement saying the report presents a "false choice" between cleaning up the bay and having a healthy economy.   It also noted that an analysis by the Environmental Protection Agency suggests that following "low-impact development" methods to control more runoff could actually lower construction costs in many cases. 

(Baltimore Sun file photos by Monica Lopossay and Glenn Fawcett)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 3:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
        

Mark your calendars now for the Sugarloaf Crafts Festival on April 16-18 at the Maryland State Fairgrounds. More than 250 artisans will showcase their contemporary crafts and fine arts, including pottery, sculpture, glass, jewelry, fashion, furniture, home accessories, items for the garden and photography.

In addition to meeting the artisans, visitors will experience demonstrations by craftspeople working in metal, ceramics, and wood. Live music and activities for children enhance the festival atmosphere. Gourmet foods are available to sample and purchase.

While you’re there, check out Sugarloaf’s selection of “green” artists, including Pretty Baby cruelty-free, all natural soaps, and Victoria Tane’s handcrafted jewelry, made from vintage and recycled elements (as seen above).

Hours are:

Friday, April 16 -- 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Saturday, April 17 --10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Sunday, April 18 -- 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Adult admission to the Sugarloaf Crafts Festival is $7 through online purchase, $8 for adults at the door, free for children under 12. Admission is good for all three days. Free parking is available.

To preview the Sugarloaf Crafts Festival, get directions, or to purchase discount admission tickets visit www.SugarloafCrafts.com or call (800) 210-9900. See more photos of exhibitors here.

Posted by Christy Zuccarini at 10:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Events
        

New Gallup polling finds Americans more willing than at any time in more than 20 years to let the environment go a bit to revive the economy, and less worried about the quality of their environment - though a majority still rate it only fair to poor.

In a survey earlier this month of more than 1,000 adults, 53 percent said economic growth should be the nation's top priority, even if the environment has to suffer. Just 38 percent put their priority on environmental protection, even if it limited growth. The share of Americans favoring the environment over growth is the lowest since 1984, according to Gallup.

When asked their assessment of the quality of their environment, 46 percent said it was excellent or good, while 53 percent chose fair or poor.  Those figures mirror attitudes in 2001.  Just 34 percent said they worried a great deal about the environment, down from 40 percent in 2008.

What do you think?  Would you prefer to see a pause or even a rollback in environmental protections to encourage more economic activity?  Or do you think that's short-sighted?   What do you think of our air quality? The Chesapeake Bay?  Getting better, worse or about the same?

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)
        

Do you buy Crystal Light powdered drink products? If you do, head out to the market on March 22 because the company is giving 100 percent of the net profits from sales to the Nature Conservancy to help protect American rivers and lakes, including the Potomac River.

It's World Water Day, and the company so dependent on water says it will give no less than  $350,000 and up to $750,000.

The money will go to four other projects besides the Potomac: the Colorado River, Great Lakes Basin, Meramec River (part of the Mississippi river) and Southern River. It will pay for an outreach and awareness campaign and an assessment of how to preserve the waterways. 

If you don't know about the Potomac, here are some tidbits from the Nature Conservancy at Crystal Light: 

It's called the “The Nation’s River,” and it flows 383 miles from its source in West Virginia through the nation’s capital and into the Chesapeake Bay. It provides drinking water to 4.3 million people in the DC metro area. It's threatened by rapid population growth and land use changes in its watershed.

For more information, go to www.Facebook.com/CrystalLight.

Baltimore Sun file photo of the Potomac in Harper's Ferry, W.Va./Monica Lopossay

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Food
        

The years-long debate in Baltimore over whether to tax or ban disposable plastic bags to reduce waste and litter appears headed for resolution - with half a ban, if that.

A council committee revamped the bag ban it had been considering for two years to give supermarkets, convenience stores and restaurants a choice: use only paper bags at checkout or encourage customers to reduce or recycle the plastic ones.  The measure now goes to the full 14-member council on Monday, March 22.

The original ban proposal got watered down to win over merchants and plastic bag manufacturers, who have been sparring with city and state lawmakers around the country to keep their products from being outlawed or taxed.  The new council measure lets Baltimore food sellers keep using flimsy plastic bags at checkout counters if they enroll in a city "plastic bag reduction program."  The program requires them to tout recycling and offer to sell customers sturdy reusable shopping bags.

That's exactly what a lot of large supermarket and chain retailers already are doing.  And recycling of plastic bags and film (such as dry cleaner bags) has increased by 28 percent nationwide since 2005, according to a new report released by the American Chemistry Council, which represents plastic bag makers.  A council exec calls plastic "a valuable resource - too valuable to waste."  The industry has launched a campaign to boost the recycling rate to 40 percent in the next five years.

Though the industry proclaims bag recycling is at an all-time high and rising, its own release indicates how far it has to go.  The same report cites the Environmental Protection Agency's estimate that just 13 percent of the bags and film dispensed nationally gets recycled.  

Council members who originally backed a bag ban or fee (aka tax) say they're willing to try this softer approach if it means they can get something on the books, finally after years of study and debate.  And they're hopeful it will lead to at least some decline in plastic bag use, which they believe should reduce opportunities for the flimsy sacks to wind up festooning trees or floating in the Inner Harbor.  

Many "mom and pop" stores on Baltimore's street corners, it's suggested, may find the bag reduction program too big a hassle, since it requires merchants to post signs and offer reusable bags for sale at their checkout counters.  Participating store owners also have to file semi-annual reports to City Hall on how many plastic and paper bags they've bought, sold and recycled.  And there's the matter of the fee - merchants can  enroll in the reduction program free of charge until Sept. 1, after which it'll cost $500. 

So that's where the partial ban comes in:  Those who don't get with the program will have to switch to using paper bags only - or risk being cited and fined $250 and up if caught still using plastic. 

Proponents of the half-ban say they'll give it a couple years to show results. If it doesn't, they say they'll dust off their discarded bids for an outright ban or for raising customers' consciousness by charging a fee for every disposable bag they ask for at the checkout counter.  Shoppers in the District of Columbia have slashed their demand for carryout bags by half since the city started requiring food sellers to charge a nickel for each on Jan. 1. 

Timing is everything, it seems. Interestingly, Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake had recently signaled her willingness to consider a similarly low bag fee here, as long as there was some exemption for the city's poorest residents.  The DC experience suggests it doesn't take much of a fee to make consumers ask themselves if they really need a carryout bag.   And it might have raised upwards of $1 million for a city that's struggling with a huge budget deficit.  

But Rawlings-Blake had come out last year, as council president, against the council bill that would have charged customers 25 cents per bag.  By the time she'd indicated a softening of her position, the fee bill, pushed by Councilman Bill Henry, had been essentially shelved in favor of working out something with the merchants and bag industry.

Baltimore's bag half-ban could still get upstaged by statewide legislation, of course.   Legislators from the Washington suburbs, joined by a few from Baltimore, are pushing a DC-like fee bill in Annapolis.   But it's a long shot at best.  As reported last week by WYPR's Joel McCord, the bag industry and merchants were joined in opposition to it by the state Department of the Environment, with a spokeswoman the agency lacks the resources to do the public education campaign called for in the bill.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)
        

Lots of music and food is planned for the Baltimore Green Works 2nd Annual Ecoball March 19 at the Frederick Douglass-Isaac Myers Maritime Park and Museum.

The event will help pay for the nonprofit group's "Sustainability Speaker Series" and other eco-friendly events.

Funk and dance band The Mooks will play the ball, timed to the vernal equinox. And Baltimore International College students will compete in the Ecoball’s “Top Chef-style” competition.

Ball-makers are encouraging ball-goers to put on their best eco-friendly outfit. They recommend shopping your closet or visiting a local consignment shop.

The ball is sponsored by Living Classrooms Foundation, Frederick Douglass - Isaac Myers Maritime Park and Museum, Lorenz Inc., Baltimore International College and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Tickets are $75 a person and $40 a student with valid student I.D. For more information and to register, click here.

Photo of last year's ball courtesy of the Ecoball

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

A deal to give some development projects a break from Maryland's new storm-water pollution regulations may not be settled just yet.

Sen. Paul G. Pinsky, presiding chairman of the legislative committee that reviews regulations, has written a letter to state Environment Secretary Shari T. Wilson saying the agreement announced last week raises "many questions," and he wants answers. His questions could cause trouble, since the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review has the power to veto emergency regulations, which are key to carrying out the deal. 

Builders, local officials and representatives of some environmental groups said last week that they'd reached what they called a compromise on the regulations, which were unveiled last year.  The rules, which require developers to do more to control polluted runoff, had riled builders and local officials, who complained they would make some projects too costly to construct.   They said they'd have to revamp projects already begun using the current, less stringent requirements.  And they warned that redevelopment would be discouraged, undermining the state's Smart Growth anti-sprawl efforts.

The parties agreed to "grandfather" an unknown number of developments already under way or with at least preliminary approval from local governments.  They also agreed to ease requirements on some redevelopment projects.  The changes would have to be made via emergency regulations to avoid the original rules from taking effect on May 4.  Wilson's Department of the Environment sent the emergency rules to Pinsky's committee at the end of last week.

Activist involved in reaching the deal said it was needed to avoid the risk that worse changes might get pushed through the General Assembly this year.  But the deal has split environmental activists, with some arguing that it was unwise to give in, considering the growing harm storm-water runoff is causing to streams and the Chesapeake Bay.  They also contend that bills granting concessions to builders and local officials would never pass the Senate.  

Pinsky, a Prince George's County Democrat, is one of the legislature's most ardent environmental advocates.  He was not party to the negotiations, which were guided by Del. Maggie McIntosh, a Baltimore Democrat who is chairwoman of the House Environemental Matters Committee.  Pinsky says he's troubled by the changes in the rules.

"I'm not real comfortable with them," Pinsky said.  While developers had raised some valid concerns, he said he was concerned that the deal went too far.  "As it is now, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night."

Though he said he was not prepared to "blow up the agreement," Pinsky said he wants more information and possibly some tweaks to the rule changes.  

Of particular concern, he said, was how many development projects in the planning pipeline would be allowed to go forward under the deal using less stringent runoff controls, with up to seven years to actually begin construction. 

"Are there 75 or 7,500?" he asked.  "I believe in data-driven decision-making.  Here we are making a major change in the regulations and no one has a clue on how it changes things on the ground.  It astounds me."

McIntosh, who had pressed for a compromise to avoid a legislative battle over the storm-water rules, said she hoped that Wilson, the environment secretary, would be able to provide Pinsky with satisfactory answers to his questions.  She said she hoped that Pinsky would allow the rules to come before the committee.  Asked if the deal could be revised without falling apart, she said, "It depends on what he's talking about."

(Baltimore Sun file photo by Glenn Fawcett)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
        

Baltimore City Council members who had been pressing to ban or levy a fee on disposable merchandise bags appear ready to embrace a more limited voluntary campaign instead to reduce the plastic sacks that frequently wind up as litter in trees, streams and the harbor.

A bill that would have banned plastic bags from being given out at groceries and other stores in the city has been recast as a "plastic bag reduction" ordinance. The council's Judiciary and Legislative Investigations Committee is scheduled to take up the new measure this morning, and chairman James B. Kraft said in an email he hopes to have it approved by the panel and sent to the full council for its consideration. (Update, the committee approved the bill. Read more here.)

The new bill would forbid food retailers only from giving out plastic bags at checkout unless they join a citywide public education campaign to get shoppers to switch to reusable bags or recycle the disposable ones. Participating merchants would have to post signs prominently saying they give out plastic bags on request only.  They would also have to collect them for recycling and offer reusable bags for sale as an option.

Kraft originally had proposed a broader ban on all merchants giving out disposable bags at checkout.  But he decided at a committee work session a couple weeks ago to abandon it in favor of a voluntary effort to reduce bag litter.  Proposals to ban or impose fees on disposable bags faced determined opposition from retailers and bag manufacturers, as well as from Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake. 

Councilman Bill Henry, who had pushed an alternate bill to levy a 25-cent fee on disposable checkout bags, said he's dropping it now in favor of the voluntary measure, which he helped craft, though he's still skeptical about its success at curbing litter.

"I think this is probably the best compromise we're going to work out for the short term," Henry said. The information retailers would be required to report to the city under Kraft's bill should show whether voluntary measures are reducing disposable bag use.  The new measure would require retailers to report semi-annually on how many plastic bags they've given out, how many taken back in for recycling, and how many shoppers go for reusable bags instead.

"Either we will be happily surprised that there's less trash than we thought we had," he said, "or we will be able to show to the more skeptical among us that voluntary measures don't work."  In that case, Henry said, he would hope to win more support for his belief that the only way effective way to get people to change their shopping-bag habits is to make them "plunk down some actual, cold hard cash" for a disposable sack at checkout.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Chesapeake Bay, News, Recycling, Shopping, Urban Issues
        

Thought about greening your house? Collecting to runoff from your roof or composting? Need some help getting started?

The Herring Run Watershed Association , at 3545 Belair Road, has some workshops coming up (if you miss these, just check back in a bit for the next class).

The next rain barrel workshop is from 6 p.m.-8 p.m. March 18. You'll learn about construction and installation and build your own barrel. It will collect storm water runoff that would wash into area waterways and save municipal water if you use it on the garden. Cost is $55 for members and $65 for non-members. Email Ashley to register at atraut@herringrun.org or call 410-254-1577 ext. 103.

The vermiculture workshop is from 6 p.m.-7:30 p.m. March 24. You'll learn about worms and build your own worm "condo." This saves on garbage when you let the worms do their thing instead of throwing away table scraps. The program is $10 for members and $15 for non-members. Same contact.

Baltimore Sun file photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Events, Going Green
        

This week's Meatless Monday recipe comes from the folks we lifted our name from: the non-profit group The Monday Campaigns, which works with in association with the Johns Hopkins’ Bloomberg School of Public Health. Their goal is to help reduce meat consumption 15% to improve people's and the planet's health.

The group got the recipe is from Donna of Fab Frugal Food.

MUSHROOM PANCAKE SALAD
Mushrooms are diced, seasoned and cooked into thin pancakes. These savory mushroom patties are then layered with tomato, cucumber and Greek yogurt to make a refreshing salad stack.

Serves 4

For the savory mushroom pancakes:

2 large eggs
2 cups low fat milk
1 tablespoon low-sodium soy sauce
1 teaspoon hot sauce
1 cup whole wheat flour
1/2 teaspoon baking powder
1 pound mushrooms, roughly chopped
A little butter or cooking spray for the skillet
3 cloves garlic, pressed
1 teaspoon kosher salt
1 teaspoon cumin

To complete the mushroom pancake stacked salad:

½ cup low fat Greek yogurt
1 tablespoon Dijon mustard
2 tomatoes, sliced
1 cucumber, sliced
2 bell peppers, sliced
To make the savory mushroom pancakes:

In a medium bowl, whisk together eggs, milk, soy sauce, hot sauce, flour and baking powder. Set aside.

Pulse the chopped mushrooms in a food processor until very finely minced.

Melt a little butter in a large skillet over medium-high heat. Add the finely diced mushrooms, garlic, salt and cumin to the skillet and cook, stirring frequently to release moisture. Cook for 5-8 minutes or until all the moisture has evaporated. Remove skillet from heat and cool to room temperature.

When mushroom mixture has cooled, stir into the egg-milk batter.

Prepare another skillet with cooking spray or melt a little butter in the skillet over medium heat. Pour about ¼ cup of batter into the skillet, spreading with the back of a spoon to form a 4-5 inch disc. Cook for 2-3 minutes per side, or until pancake has been cooked through. Repeat until you are out of batter.

To complete the mushroom pancake stacked salad:

Mix Greek yogurt and Dijon mustard together in a small bowl.

Spread one pancake with a small spoonful of the yogurt mixture. Layer one slice tomato, one slice cucumber and one slice bell pepper on top of the pancake. Repeat so stacked salad has 2 yogurt covered pancakes and 2 slices of all the veggies.

Repeat process until you have made several stacked salads and are out of pancakes. Enjoy!

Photo courtesy of The Monday Campaigns

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 6:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Food
        

Some greens are steamed, it seems, over the agreement reached among builders, local officials and some environmentalists to give some developers breaks from tough new requirements to control polluted runoff.

"I think we wimped out on this one," Patuxent Riverkeeper Fred Tutman said of the deal announced Monday, which averted a fight in Annapolis over legislative efforts to delay and weaken new state storm-water pollution regulations.

Under the deal, some development projects that are already partially built or that have substantial investment in planning will be able to avoid the new rules, which take effect May 4, requiring a reduction in runoff from newly constructed buildings, lawns and pavement.  Some redevelopment projects also will get a break if they are being built in designated growth areas served by public utilities or near transit lines.

Builders complained it was costly and unfair to make projects already in the development pipeline comply with the new rules, which require leaving more land open to let rainfall soak in, instead of being collected in large surface ponds or underground tanks.  Local officials also objected that the new requirements could hurt redevelopment projects, undermining the state's Smart Growth policies aimed at curbing sprawl.

Lawmakers had introduced several bills aimed at addressing those complaints, but some proposals went further, in at least one case delaying the rules for up to a decade.  At the behest of Del. Maggie McIntosh, a Baltimore Democrat and chairwoman of the House Environmental Matters Committee, representatives of builders, county and municipal officials and environmental groups huddled for a week and struck what all called a fair compromise.  With the Maryland Department of the Environment pledging to revise its rules by emergency regulation, McIntosh said the storm-water bills would remain cooped up in her committee.

Environmental activists engaged in the talks - representing the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and 1000 Friends of Maryland -- said they reluctantly agreed to some delay and softening of the rules in order to avoid risking potentially bigger concessions being made by the legislature. They noted that they had gotten developers to agree to limits on how long they could avoid complying with the new runoff rules.  Projects with preliminary local approval could avoid the tougher storm-water control requirements, but would have to get final approval by May 2013 and start construction by 2017.

But Tutman, who was not party to the negotiations, contended that those terms actually grant developers more time to delay construction than some localities currently allow before projects would have to reapply for permits and comply with new regulatory requirements.  He called the deal "hardly a bargain."

Wayne T. Gilchrest, a former congressman from the Eastern Shore, also called the deal "ridiculous" and unnecessary.  He said he and former Gov. Harry R. Hughes and former U.S. Sen. Joseph Tydings had traveled to Annapolis last week to urge legislators not to delay or water down the new runoff rules.  Though some lawmakers had indicated they were getting a lot of pressure from builders and local officials in their communities, Gilchrest said leaders in the House and Senate had assured them "nothing's going to happen."

"We never thought it was going anyplace," Tutman said of the storm-water legislation.  The deal, he added, "was a safe place for environmentalists who didn't want to roll the dice."

Gilchrest, who championed environmental causes during his tenure in Congress, said tough measures are needed to reduce polluted runoff from development, because it is a major and growing threat to the health of the Chesapeake Bay.

"We just can't sit on our hands and be timid about these issues," the former congressman said. "You've got to be bold now -- and if you aren't bold now, we'll just keep losing ground."

Other activists were not as upset.  Erik Michelsen, executive director of the South River Federation in Anne Arundel County, said he felt "pretty relieved" by the agreement and had been kept apprised of the talks.  While some aspects of it were "far from ideal," overall he said it seemed fair and better than taking a chance that legislators feeling election-year heat might pass something more sweeping.

"The people who've spent a fair amount of time in Annapolis this year recognize it's a difficult climate," Michelsen said.

It remains to be seen if the discord will unravel the deal.  An Annapolis press conference that had been planned Wednesday by some dissenters to denounce any weakening or delay of the rules was canceled, without explanation.

(Baltimore Sun file photo)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 9:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
        

In case anyone hasn't been around Baltimore's waterfront lately, the Inner Harbor is frequently awash in floating and submerged trash.   That should be no surprise even to landlubbers, given the litter readily seen in alleys and vacant lots, in street gutters and in the storm drains that ultimately empty into the city's watery heart.

A City Council committee held an "informational hearing" Tuesday on how to reduce the torrents of refuse and debris that flow into the harbor every time it rains. It quickly broadened into a spirited discussion of illegal trash dumping, uneven enforcement by the city, and a lack of engagement by municipal officials with residents who feel besieged by the blight.

Councilman James B. Kraft, chairman of the judicial and legislative investigations committee, professed himself "very very frustrated" with the lack of progress on the issue despite numerous meetings since a council resolution calling for an inquiry into the harbor's trash problem was introduced in December 2008.   "It feels like we are in some cases going backwards, not forwards," chimed in Councilman William H. Cole IV, chief sponsor of the resolution.

"We're not where we need to be," acknowledged Marcia Collins of the city's Department of Public Works.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officially designated Baltimore's harbor "impaired" by trash nearly two years ago, pointed out Phil Lee of the Baltimore Harbor Watershed Association.   Though not traditionally considered a pollutant, the floating debris makes the water uninviting to look at, much less swim in. It's also a carrier of some of the bacteria and other pollutants making the water unsafe for human contact.  As a result, the city will face increasing legal pressure from state and federal government to clean the harbor up.

Where does all the floating waste come from?  According to a report given to the council Tuesday, more than 300,000 pounds of trash and debris were collected in just eight months in 2008 from the Jones Falls where it flows into the harbor.  A little more than half of it was "natural" -- leaves, tree and bush branches and other plant material.   The rest was decidedly man-made - an estimated 189,000 plastic bottles, 160,000 foam cups and 58,000 grocery bags, among other things. 

(That last raises a question about whether plastic carryout bags are one of the harbor's primary litter problems. Kraft's council committee has been mulling various legislative efforts to reduce litter by discouraging stores from giving away disposable paper and plastic bags for holding their merchandise whenever shoppers make a purchase.

But the most frequently seen litter in the Jones Falls, it seems, are cigarette butts.  More than 1 million were plucked from mounds of trash collected at the stream's mouth.  Maybe the council should look closer at smoking in public?  Maybe require outdoor ashtrays at bars, office buildings and other places where smokers congregate outdoors these days to get their nicotine fix, since indoor smoking is largely banned?)

Trash booms and collectors have been posted at a few of the larger storm-water outfalls that flush into the harbor.  There are plans afoot to deploy more trash nets and booms, a multi-million-dollar capital expenditure the city can ill afford in its current anemic fiscal condition.

But some of the residents who came downtown for Tuesday's hearing suggested the litter cleanup needs to start in neighborhoods far from the waterfront.   City officials need to work more cooperatively with residents, they said, rather than merely fine them whenever they put their trash or recyclables out in the wrong container, wrong day or wrong place.

Representatives of the Baltimore Harbor Watershed Association displayed maps showing red dots sprinkled throughout the neighborhoods inland from harborfront Canton where residents say there's illegal dumping and storm drains jammed with trash.  They showed photos of trash bags and debris piled in vacant lots, which they say have gone uncollected for a week or more after residents call to report them.

"We need to change things - boldly, radically change things," said Dr. Ray Bahr, a retired cardiologist and Canton resident. Residents who feel ignored and abused have given up on calling the city's 311 hotline to report problems, he said.

"The Inner Harbor is not going to be clean if we do not get the city clean," warned Russell Stewart, of East Baltimore, who echoed Bahr's comment about city unresponsiveness to residents calling in complaints about illegal dumping. "If you do not win the community over, you can forget it,'' he added.  "You'll be wasting your time and money."

There was debate about whether the bulk of the litter is home-grown or imported.  Some suggested irresponsible contractors, commuters and landlords were to blame for much of the debris dumped in streets, alleys and vacant lots.  Drug dealers also, apparently.  But others pointed to renters for a lot of the trash.  Even well-intentioned residents got fingered, for sweeping refuse from their walks into gutters and storm drains. 

"Somewhere along the line, we've got to stop this Catch 22 and do something,'' said Bahr.

Kraft said he and other council members would consult with a selection of residents and other stakeholders to draw up new regulations or legislation to tackle the problem.  The committee plans another, final hearing on harbor trash July 6. 

(Baltimore Sun file photos by Amy Davis, Jed Kirschbaum and Steve Ruark)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (18)
        

While Baltimore lawmakers appear to be backing away from regulating disposable bags in the city, some legislators in Annapolis want to require merchants statewide to charge customers a nickel per bag for most throwaway sacks they now get for free to carry away their purchases.

The proposed "Chesapeake Bay Restoration Consumer Retail Choice Act of 2010" gets heard at 1 p.m. today (March 10) in the House Environmental Matters Committee (HB351) and Senate Finance Committee (SB462).

The identical bills, put in by Montgomery County legislators, bear similarities to the nickel-a-bag fee imposed recently in the District of Columbia, which is credited with cutting customer demand for disposable carryout bags by half or more in the few months since it took effect Jan. 1.  Like the DC fee, which is dedicated to the Anacostia River cleanup, revenues raised by the state bag fee would be earmarked for the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Trust Fund, which goes to help curb polluted runoff from farms and developed lands.  That fund, originally approved at $50 million a year, has never gotten that much, as budget troubles have trimmed it to $20 million - and it may get slashed again to $10 million this year, if budget analysts' recommendations are followed.

The fee would not apply to bags for certain goods, such as produce, candy, meats, flowers, carryout food from a restaurant and small hardware items.  Merchants could keep one cent of the fee for their trouble collecting it - and another two cents if they offer customers credits for bringing in their own reusable bags.   Any bags distributed by stores would have to be recyclable - 40 percent post-consumer if paper, or polyethylene code 2 or 4 if plastic.

Do you think a statewide fee as low as a nickel would get consumers to cut down on disposable bags that may wind up as litter?  Or do you think all that's needed is tighter enforcement of litter laws and more public education about the benefits of recycling?  Those seem to have been the two chief arguments around fees like this.   Does anyone know where a recycling campaign has reduced litter significantly?  Or a fee, for that matter? 

(AP photo)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
        

Builders, environmentalists and local officials seem to have settled their differences over Maryland's new requirements for reducing polluted runoff from development projects.

As reported in The Baltimore Sun today, a deal's been struck that avoids a fight in Annapolis over legislative attempts to weaken or delay the state's storm-water pollution regulations. Hearings scheduled Wednesday in the House Environmental Matters Committee on bills backed by builders and county and municipal officials have been canceled, in favor of emergency regulations the state Department of the Environment is crafting to address their concerns with the runoff rules that were issued last year.

The rules, written to carry out a storm-water law adopted in 2007, would require builders to leave more of their sites unpaved so rainfall would soak into the ground, discouraging the current practice of collecting runoff in large ponds or underground tanks. The aim of the law and the regulations is to keep storm-water from washing fertilizer, animal waste, oil and other pollution off developed land into nearby streams and rivers. Such runoff is a significant and growing threat to the Chesapeake Bay, officials have said.

But builders had complained that it was unfair to impose the new rules, which take effect May 4, on projects that are already in the pipeline for approval by county or municipal governments. They contended that they had invested hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in planning and constructing those projects, and some had even put in the ponds and other pollution controls large enough to handle storm runoff from homes and buildings yet to be constructed. They argued that the added cost could stifle construction at a time when Maryland's economy is struggling.

Local officials likewise objected that the rules' emphasis on reducing pavement to let rainfall soak into the ground could increase the costs of redevelopment. That would undermine the state's Smart Growth policies, they argued, which were meant to encourage more compact development.

Environmentalists and state officials had countered that the rules were needed and not that onerous, but critics appeared to have made inroads in Annnapolis. Del. Maggie McIntosh, a Baltimore Democrat and powerful chairwoman of the House Environmental Matters Committee, was among those who'd expressed concerns, and she said she'd heard from many of her colleagues as well.

Under the deal, builders whose projects already have preliminary approval from local governments could avoid having to meet the new rules. No one knows how many projects would get to go forward with less effective pollution controls, but environmentalists succeeded in putting some time limits on the "grandfathering." Those projects would have to get final local government approval by May 2013 and begin construction by 2017, or else meet the new runoff control requirements.

Environmentalists said they felt compelled to give builders more time to meet the new rules, to avoid a fight in Annapolis that they couldn't be sure of winning.  But they felt better about it, having put some limits on it.

On redevelopment, local officials would be given limited leeway to relax the runoff rules for projects being built in designated growth areas that are served by public water and sewer. One of the points of contention was over redevelopment on relatively open sites where 40 percent or less of the land was covered by pavement or buildings. Under the new rules, those would have been forced to meet much stiffer runoff control standards than more densely built-up sites. The newly announced deal eases the requirements for such projects to retain their rainfall runoff - though they would still have to take steps to filter out pollutants.

That compromise could mean continuing erosion of nearby streams, but environmentalists said they felt pressured to make some concessions to avoid pushing development into "green fields," where there would be more open land to meet the storm-water control requirements. They pledged to keep an eye on the flexibility given local officials and to try to tighten the regulations if streams continue to degrade.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
        

Do you know where your chicken comes from? What’s in it? And what pollution was left behind?

Journalist David Kirby will talk about this and his book “Animal Farm” tonight from 5 p.m.-6:30 p.m. at the JHU Center for a Livable Future, Sheldon Hall, Room W1214, 615 N. Wolfe St.

The book explores the environmental, social and economic implications of how we raise and market chicken, pork and beef. He follows the system from the start on the large industrial farms to the dinner table.

A portion of the book focuses on Carole Morrison, who until recently grew chickens for Perdue. Kirby said in interview today with The Sun that she quit because she couldn’t take all of the dictates from the company, which owned all the birds, including demands that she build chicken houses with little air and light.

Kirby also discusses the implications for the health of the Chesapeake Bay from chicken waste and for human health from additives given to the birds. He discovered cancer clusters in many of the large farming communities in the Delmarva region.

“I was most surprised by the states that are supposedly progressively blue, or green, or however you label them, when it comes to environmental enforcement of agriculture,” he said. “Some are really surprisingly lax. Washington state, in dealing with the dairies, and Maryland, in dealing with the chickens. It was surprising to me that there was such little monitoring and enforcement.”

He said the Obama administration has inidcated it will be more agressive than previous administrations and is rewriting regulations to controll pollution from the large ag producers, but implementation is years away.

If you miss the talk tonight, Kirby will be a guest on the Marc Steiner show tomorrow, which runs from 5 p.m.-7 p.m. on WEAA 88.9 FM.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 2:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

Feel like growth and development in Maryland could be better thought-out and managed? The state Department of Planning intends to write a statewide growth plan over the next year and wants to hear from the public on how economic and population growth can be better balanced with protecting farmland, forests and the environment. You can read a story about the effort here that appeared in The Baltimore Sun today.

A series of 13 public forums to talk about the planning effort are being scheduled over the next three or four months. The first is to be held at Carroll Community College, 1601 Washington Road in Westminster, in the "K" building auditorium. There'll be an open house beginning at 6 p.m., with presentations, questions and discussion starting at 7 p.m. For directions, go here.

The next one after that will be in Baltimore on March 18, at Coppin State University, 2500 West North Avenue in the Talon Center.  It also will run from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.  Other forums are planned around the state. For a list, go here.  For more info on "PlanMaryland," as the effort is called, go here.

(2006 Baltimore Sun photo by David Hobby)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 11:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
        

These are some recipes from a little coffee shop and eatery in the Federal Hill/Riverside area of South Baltimore called Koba Cafe (644 E Fort Ave. 410-986-0366).

They are the creation of owner Adama Fall, who likes to travel and sample foods and then come home and produce his own versions for his customers.

He has seating, free Wi-Fi and local art on the walls, so there's usually some people lingering over coffee and lunch. Adama will likely be behind the counter, and he's usually willing to give you a taste. If you prefer to try the recipes at home, he's provided them below:

VEGETARIAN CURRY LENTIL SOUP
1 tablespoon olive oil
1 lb. green lentils (soaked overnight)
1 tablespoon spicy curry powder
1/2 onion, chopped
4 garlic cloves, chopped
1/2 stack of celery, chopped
2 carrots, chopped
1 1/2 teaspoon ground cumin
1/2 teaspoon black pepper
salt and additional pepper to taste
 
Heat oil in a skillet over medium heat.  Place chopped onion and garlic in skillet and cook until evenly browned.  Add curry powder and mix well with onion/garlic mixture.
 
Add 20 oz. water. Stir.  Add cumin, salt, and 1/2 teaspoon pepper.
 
Bring to a boil and add drained lentils.  Cook for 2 hours over medium heat.
 
Reduce heat, add chopped carrots and celery.  Simmer for 10 minutes.  Season to taste with salt and pepper.
 
Serves 10 people.

VEGETARIAN CHILI
1 tablespoon olive oil
1 lb. black kidney beans (soaked overnight)
1/2 small can tomato paste
1/2 onion, chopped
1 bag sweet corn
3 garlic cloves, chopped
1 green bell pepper, chopped
2 roma tomatoes, chopped
1/8 teaspoon ground cayenne pepper
1/2 teaspoon dried oregano
1 1/2 teaspoons ground cumin
1 1/2 teaspoons chili powder
salt and pepper to taste
 
Heat oil in a skillet over medium heat.  Place chooped onions and garlic and tomato paste in the skillet and cook until evenly browned.
 
Add 20 oz. of water. Stir.  Season with chili powder, salt, pepper, cumin, and oregano.
 
Bring to a boil and add the drained black kidney beans.
 
Turn the heat to medium and cook for approximately 2 hours.
 
Reduce heat and then add chopped green pepper, diced tomoto, and sweet corn.  Stir all together, season with salt and pepper to taste, and you're all done.
 
Best served the next day once all the ingredients have had a chance to marry.
 
Serves 10 people.

Photo courtesy of Earl via flickr

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Food
        

Maryland's watermen are pulling in a little extra income while retrieving some of the thousands of crab pots they lose every year in the Chesapeake Bay. I wrote a story about the effort in The Baltimore Sun, which you can read here.

But as a bonus, here's a video, shot by Sun photographer/videographer Jed Kirschbaum, showing the watermen in action and explaining the work in their own words.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 8:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
        

Health advocates are making another push to beef up Maryland's 16-year-old law to protect children from lead-paint poisoning, arguing that more needs to be done to ensure the safety of youngsters living in the state's large stock of older rental housing. But the effort is running up against the usual resistance from landlords, who contend it would be costly and unnecessary.

Specifically, advocates - along with local officials - want the state to require that rental units built before 1950 get tested for lead dust to ensure that the necessary steps have been taken to render them free of the toxic contaminant that once was widely used in house paint.  They backed SB504 at a hearing in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Thursday, and plan to do so again today (Friday) for HB1153 in the House Environmental Matters Committee.  Similar bills failed to pass last year.

Landlords now have the option of testing for dust or doing a visual inspection to verify that the unit's paint is intact, it's been properly cleaned and other steps have been taken to remove or cover potential sources of lead-paint flakes or dust.

Eyeballing units to see if they're safe isn't nearly as reliable as swiping floors and painted surfaces to test for the presence of lead dust, advocates say.  Toddlers who ingest even minute amounts of the toxic dust can suffer brain and neurological damage that can lead to lifelong learning and behavior problems, health experts note.  Studies have found that up to three-quarters of homes that passed visual inspection flunked a test for lead dust. And a Baltimore city health official noted that in 2007 there were 21 cases of lead poisoning in homes that had supposedly been certified as free of lead-paint hazards on the basis of visual checks.

The vast majority of landlords with pre-1950 units already use lead-dust testing.  But they objected to being required to do so, arguing that the legislation would also force them to do additional work on their units to comply with a risk-reduction checklist, such as putting vinyl or aluminum caps on some painted window surfaces where lead paint may exist. 

The visual tests cost $75, while the lead dust tests cost $200 to $300, witnesses testified.  Additional work to comply with the risk-reduction checklist might bring the total up to $1,000 per unit, according to a legislative analysis of the bill.   Robert Enten, a lobbyist for landlords, argued the requirement would collectively cost rental property owners in the state millions of dollars.  And he contended it was unnecessary because lead poisoning cases in Maryland have declined by 95 percent since 1995 - which he said was evidence that current requirements are working.

But advocates pointed out that there were still more than 700 children statewide - 468 in Baltimore city alone - who were exposed to harmful levels of lead dust in 2008, the most recent year for which data are available.  Dust testing is necessary to bring Maryland in line with federal housing standards, they said, and to bring Maryland one step closer in its campaign to eliminating this childhood environmental health scourge by the end of this year.

Not all landlords object to lead dust testing.  Tom Karle of Summit Investment Properties, which has more than 500 rental units in Baltimore, said their properties are routinely tested for dust.  The visual test is unreliable and prone to fraud, he said, and the extra cost of dust testing is more than made up for by avoiding the huge costs of treating poisoned children - and the social costs associated with their lead-induced learning disabilities and behavior problems.  Requiring every landlord to test for dust would eliminate a double standard in the law, and create a "level playing field" for all rental property owners, he said.

While health advocates and landlords spar over lead dust testing in pre-1950 homes, they agree that more needs to be done to educate homeowners and tenants of rental units built between 1950 and 1978, when lead paint was banned nationwide.  Those are not covered by Maryland's lead risk reduction law, and residents of such units accounted for 62 percent of the poisoning cases in 2008.

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
        

Just in time for Earth Day this April 22, Ma Petite Shoe in Hampden plans to begin carrying some hipster eco-friendly shoes that will help you tread a little lighter on the planet.

The sneakers are from the Bio-D Collection from Santa Barbara, Calif.-based Simple shoes and made from biodegradable and organic materials.

The folks at the store describe the shoes this way: They feature biodegradable soles and incorporate rubber, plastic and EVA (foaming materials) that are manufactured using EcoPure, an organic compound that will eventually eat away at the bonds holding these materials together. 

This allows the mid-soles and outsoles of the styles, when exposed to the moisture and heat typical of landfills, to biodegrade in 20 years as opposed to the industry average of 1,000 years.  

“When we first heard about the concept of biodegradable shoes, we were intrigued," said Susannah Siger, store owner, in a statement. "When we learned more about the technology, that it wasn’t just hype, we immediately wished that all shoes had biodegradable features.”

Women get blue with hot pink detailing. Men get orange with brown and white detailing. The linings also are organic cotton are uppers are suede. Sneakers on the Simple Web site run from  $55-$80.

Are you cool enough for these shoes?

Photo courtesy of the store

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 8:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: Products
        

The chief sponsor of the bill to ban plastic retail bags in Baltimore has backed off in favor of trying a "mandatory-voluntary" recycling campaign to reduce the litter blanketing the city's trees, streams and harbor.

Councilman James B. Kraft, a Democrat representing Canton, outlined his new approach at a City Council committee work session on Thursday, where he explained that he wanted to revise the ban he'd proposed and work with retailers to discourage the free distribution of disposable plastic and paper bags at the checkout counter.

He suggested a public education campaign, in which retailers tell their customers they'll only get a bag at checkout if they ask for one. Meanwhile, the city, retailers and community groups would promote shoppers' use of reusable bags or recycling of any bags given out at stores - much like the sign photographed above as it appeared in a Whole Foods market in Annapolis in 2007.

"I don't think we're ready to move forward with a ban," Kraft said after the session.  He added that a "lot of legitimate concerns have been raised" by retailers about the ban he had proposed last year. The idea, Kraft explained, is "so we could show with cooperation and participation by everyone that we're reducing the number of bags out there on the streets and in the harbor." Kraft asked council members Bill Henry and Mary Pat Clarke to work with representatives of the city's retailers, bag manufacturers and advocates for sustainability on crafting a new bill. The revamped measure is scheduled now to be presented on March 16.

 Left on the council committee table, for now at least, is the alternative bill sponsored by Henry, a North Baltimore Democrat. It would levy a 25 cent fee on all carryout plastic and paper bags. Henry said he was still mulling whether to push it with a reduction or change in the proposed fee.  One option under consideration is dropping the fee to as little as 5 cents a bag, not unlike the litter reduction ordinance that I wrote about in the District of Columbia.

Clarke, a Democrat representing north central Baltimore, indicated she'd prefer to hold retailers' feet to the fire by setting goals for the voluntary bag reduction campaign and then having a fee or ban automatically kick in if those goals are not met after a suitable time, such as a year or two. Kraft, though, who is chairman of the council committee considering the bills, said he could not support any measure that would automatically trigger a fee or ban.

Robert Santoni of Santoni's, a local supermarket chain, welcomed Kraft's shift to working with retailers to reduce customers' carryout bag usage. He said since city council members have begun talking about banning or taxing bags, his stores have been promoting reusable bags and recycling, with success. He argued that whatever educational campaign the city and retailers came up with ought to be given three years to prove itself. And he cautioned council members against doing anything that might depress sales in the city.

"I'm not about to lose one bag of groceries to a county store because they (customers) don't want to jump through all of the hoops," Santoni said.

But others at the council session questioned whether a voluntary push would reduce bag litter enough quickly enough.

"I'm not confident that any voluntary programs are going to work,'' said Lynn Heller, a Roland Park resident who is a member of the city's sustainability commission. She held out for consideration of at least a modest fee of five cents a bag on disposable satchels. "Nothing changes behavior like money. If you really want to get plastic bags out of the harbor in the next three years, you charge a fee."

Henry, chief sponsor of the fee bill, said he was willing to explore Kraft's idea for now. "I want less litter," Henry said. He added that he's become convinced that large grocery chains like Santoni's and Safeway are not the sources of most of the plastic bags he sees on the streets or in streams. But Henry added that if other council members do not support Kraft's idea, he was still prepared to push for a fee on all disposable plastic and paper bags.

(2007 Baltimore Sun file photo by Jed Kirschbaum)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: News, Recycling, Shopping, Urban Issues
        

Drink your greens with the folks from Baltimore Vegan Drinks, this Friday starting at 8 p.m. at the Dionysus Restaurant and Lounge. It’s a happy-hour style gathering for Baltimore vegans, vegetarians, and those who have an interest in living green. A menu of vegan drinks will be prepared, including Soymilk Caucasians, Vegan Bloody Mary, Organic Crop Cucumber Martinis*, and Dionysus’ own Basilicious (just try it). Also included are some local vegan wines like Red Truck Organic Petit Sirah, Pink Truck Rose, Boordy Pinot Noir, and Boordy Seval Vidal.

*A note about Crop Organic Vodka – if you haven’t tried it, you must. It’s probably the purest tasting vodka you will ever drink and it’s certified organic. According to the company, the grain is grown in healthy, artificial fertilizer-free soil and they don’t use any carbon treatment or charcoal filtering in their distilment process. It comes in three flavors: Cucumber, Tomato, and Artisinal. Dionysus uses the tomato flavor for their savory Basilicious drink, which is simply out of this world! The Crop web site is also full of recipes.

So if that’s not enough to convince you to “drink your greens” Friday night, I’m at a loss. If, however, you are planning on going, be sure to R.S.V.P.. Cheers!

Image courtesy of Crop Organic Vodka.

Posted by Christy Zuccarini at 3:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Events
        

West Virginia Democrat Jay Rockefeller said he would introduce legislation today to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases for two years from power plants. He's trying to protect home interests -- the coal industry.

Rockefeller said the bill would give Congress time to work out its own energy rules.

“Today, we took important action to safeguard jobs, the coal industry, and the entire economy as we move toward clean coal technology,” he said. “This legislation will issue a two year suspension on EPA regulation of greenhouse gases from stationary sources—giving Congress the time it needs to address an issue as complicated and expansive as our energy future.  Congress, not the EPA, must be the ideal decision-maker on such a challenging issue."
 
He said he sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson challenging potential regulations and she responded in a letter that she could delay until the end of 2010, but Rockefeller said this was a "positive" move but wasn't enough time for a comprehensive energy bill to pass and clean coal technology to be pursued.

There is a house bill being introduced by Rep. Nick Rahall, Democrat of West Virginia.

The bills would protect the power plants from having to seek permits to meet a New Source Performance Standard under the Clean Air Act for carbon dioxide or methane. They would allow for the new EPA rules to apply to the auto industry, however. The Obama administration negotiated a deal for new emissions standards.

The Supreme Court gave the EPA authority in 2007 to regulate greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act. SO, legislation is necessary if Congress wants to stop or delay regulations -- something Rockefeller says is needed to protect jobs and local economies.

So, given that energy legislation is no less controversial than heath care legislation and likely to face major hurdles in Congress, do you think the EPA should go ahead and regulate power plant emissions now? Or is this really not something EPA should be stepping into on its own without Congressional input given the dicey jobs situation?

Baltimore Sun file photo of the Brandon Shores power plant, on which a pollution control scrubber was recently installed per Maryland's 2006 Healthy Air Act/Kenneth K. Lam

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 2:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Climate change
        

Ahead of the March 13 reopening of the Maryland Zoo in Baltimore, a crew from the Parks & People Foundation will head over to help the clean-up effort.

Clean Up, Green Up teams will clear debris, care for damaged plants and do some minor building repairs.  The teams are groups of young people hired by Parks & People to prepare for envrionmental careers.

Four teams of five members will head to the zoo tomorrow and Friday.  

They teams were formed last month. They are funded hrough U.S. Forest Service stimulus money. They will also retore urban habitat and watersheds and help with other tasks in community forrestry, trail maintenance, horticulture, landscaping, light construction, invasive plant species removal and trash clean ups and removal during the next 18 months.  The projects aim to help restore the Chesapeake Bay.

“We thought this would be a good way to help out a neighbor and show the spirit of community that Parks & People tries to instill in all of its programs,” said Guy Hager, Parks & People’s Director of Great Parks, Clean Streams and Green Communities, in a statement. “This will be a great opportunity for the teams to get their hands dirty and help out one of our partner organizations.”   

For more information on the Parks & People Foundation’s Clean Up, Green Up teams and other programs, click here or call 410-448-5663.

Baltimore Sun file photo of the Maryland Zoo's Maryland Wilderness Exhibit after being damaged by the snow/Algerina Perna

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 11:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Parks
        

A new study shows that frogs exposed to a common herbicide changed from male to female in about 10 percent of the cases, raising questions about the safety of atrazine for humans. 

Atrazine, is one of the most commonly applied pesticides in the world, according to the study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences released Monday. And it's the most commonly detected pesticide contaminant of ground, surface and drinking water -- it's found in the waterways that feed the Chesapeake Bay.

The study calls it a "potent endocrine disruptor that is active at low, ecologically relevant concentrations."

The frogs in the study were chemically castrated and feminized by atrazine. Ten percent developed into females that produced viable eggs. The offspring were all male with decreased fertility, and "exemplify the role that atrzaine and other endocrine-disrupting pesticides likely plan in global amphibian declines," the study says.

It's one study, but what could this mean for humans?

The Washington Post  reports today that the EPA, which reapproved atrazine's use in 2006, is taking another look at the public health implications.

Baltimore Sun file photo of Sandy Point State Park on the Chesapeake Bay

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: News
        

What's clean water and a healthy Chesapeake Bay worth to you?  Lawmakers in Annapolis are eyeing legislation that would require every city, county and town in Maryland to assess a "stormwater remediation fee" on all property owners.

Environmental advocates plan to press for passage of the measure (SB686/HB999) at a hearing today in the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee. They point out that urban and suburban runoff is a significant and growing source of pollution of the bay as well as of local rivers and streams.

Retrofitting storm drains and reducing pavement in existing communities to keep litter, oil, dog poop and lawn fertilizer out of the water could cost billions in Baltimore city alone - and upwards of $20 billion statewide, by some estimates.

So far, only three counties and three municipal governments levy any sort of fee to help fix the storm-water problems in their communities: Charles, Prince Georges and Montgomery counties, plus Annapolis, Rockville and Takoma Park. Baltimore city and Anne Arundel, Carroll and Howard counties have talked about fees, but have balked at imposing them.  That's why advocates want the state to require them - to give local politicians the spine - or cover - to act.

The bill would leave the size of the fees up to local officials, but would require that all homeowners in each community be charged the same amount.  Non-residential property owners would have to pay based on the amount of pavement and roof they have. Such "impervious surfaces" are the bane of stream health, biologists point out, because streets, parking lots, walkways and buildings prevent rainfall from soaking into the ground.

A storm-water fee is needed to deal with urban and suburban runoff, argues Clean Water Action's Andy Galli, just as the "flush tax" was called for to upgrade sewage treatment plants in Maryland.  That fee was adopted six years ago.  The storm-water fee's prospects this year remain to be seen. Politicians are leery of raising taxes -- especially now, in the midst of a recession -- and lawmakers in Annapolis have a $2 billion state budget gap to close.

But Halle Vander Gaag of the Jones Falls Watershed Association emailed that she was "pleasantly surprised" by the level of public support seen in recent polling done for environmental groups on the issue.   In a statewide survey by OpinionWorks of Annapolis, half of those asked said they'd be willing to pay an unspecified "reasonable" monthly storm-water fee, with 36 percent opposed.  Another five percent said their support would depend on the size of the fee.

Nearly three-fourths, though, said they'd be inclined to support the fee if one would be imposed in every community statewide, and if the funds would be spent cleaning up streams in their local communities and generating jobs.

What do you think? Would you be willing to pay roughly $1 a month per person to prevent pollution and contaminants from washing off your lawn, driveway, neighborhood streets and parking lots? Legislative analysts estimate that would raise $74 million a year statewide - not the billions said to be needed, but a start, advocates say.

(2009 Baltimore Sun photy by Liz Kay)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (39)
        

Which is worse for the nation's environment - animal manure or chemical fertilizer? 

According to a story today in the Washington Post, the waste generated by farms raising cattle, hogs, chickens and turkeys is getting into the water (and air) in increasing quantities, even as environmental laws are cracking down on other pollutants. 

Farm animal manure (like the chicken manure being cleaned out of an Eastern Shore poultry house in the above photo) is responsible for roughly a quarter of the nitrogen helping to create a massive dead zone in the heart of the Chesapeake Bay, David Farenthold points out.  It's also a factor in more than 200 other coastal dead zones around the country.  Modern industrial-scale animal farming simply generates too much manure to safely spread on crop fields - the excess washes off into nearby water ways.

But fertilizing farm fields with chemical or synthetic nitrogen (aka "artificial manure") doesn't seem any better for the environment, according to an ongoing series in Grist, the Seattle-based online publication of green news and commentary.   The latest installment, which you can read here, reports on research finding that synthetic nitrogen winds up damaging the soil and destroying its ability to absorb climate-warming carbon dioxide.

What's a farmer to do?  Correction, what are we all to do, since we're the ultimate consumers of those crops the farmers raise?  Is there more that can and should be done to control fertilizer use to protect our streams, rivers and bays?  Can we cut back on fertilizer use without harming food production?  Food for thought.

(2008 Baltimore Sun file photo by Doug Kapustin)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 2:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Chesapeake Bay, Climate change, Food, News
        

Baltimore City is officially back to normal with trash and recycling pickup, as of tomorrow. They are also returning to enforcement. See the release from the city below for more details:

TRASH AND RECYCLING COLLECTIONS:

* Citizens should put their trash and recycling materials out at their regular collection locations.

* Citizens should ONLY put out trash OR recycling on their regularly scheduled collection day.

* Trash must be placed in cans with tight-fitting lids - it's the law.

* Residents putting out trash in plastic bags may receive violations for not using proper receptacles.

* Recycling materials may be place in any container as long as it's marked "Recycle."

* Call 311 for missed pick-ups.

* PLEASE DO NOT PUT RECYCLING MATERIALS IN PLASTIC BAGS!

* Citizen Drop-Off Centers remain open to the public at their regularly scheduled times. Citizens can go to www.baltimorecity.gov or www.cleanergreenerbaltimore.com to find their nearest drop-off center.

* Bulk Trash pick up appointments for the month of February are currently in the process of being rescheduled.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: News
        

Ever drink a soda on a plane? Plenty of people do, and most of the resulting waste, coupled with waste made on the ground, is not recycled.  

Nearly 500 million pounds could be recycled and isn't, including half of the waste made in flight, according to a report from Green America's responsibleshopper.org.

Some airlines do some recycling, the group says. But not enough. There's lots of food that can be composted and lost of wrapping getting thrown away.

The group ranks airlines (from best to worst): Delta Airlines, Virgin America, Virgin Atlantic, Southwest, Continental, Jet Blue, American, British Airways, Air Tran, United and US Airways. 

"For concerned consumers looking to spend their travel dollars wisely, airline waste may be the ultimate example of ‘what goes up must come down,’" said Victoria Kreha, Green America Responsible Shopper lead researcher, in a statement. "The good news is that airlines are starting to pay attention to recycling; the bad news is that they have a long way to go to improve the situation.

The report looked at five areas: variety in waste recycled, future in-flight recycling plans, size of in-flight recycling program, education/encouragement of employees in onboard recycling programs, other in-flight sustainability initiatives and provides overall rankings.  No one got a grade higher than a B- overall.

About three-quarters of in-flight waste is recyclable, but only 20 percent is recycled, the group says.

The stuff tossed amounts to enough aluminum cans to build 58 Boeing 747 jets, and enough newspaper and magazines to cover a football field 230 meters deep. Recycling would also create jobs, the group says, citing a report that recycling creates six times as many jobs as sending stuff to the landfill. And some airlines aren't even living up to their own recycling policies, the group found.

Read the full report at http://www.greenamericatoday.org/go/AirlineRecyclingReport/. 

Baltimore Sun file photo of recycling bins at BWI airport/Jed Kirschbaum

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Going Green
        

Constellation Energy plans a celebration today of the startup of its new emissions scrubber system at the Brandon Shores power plant near the mouth of the Patapsco River.  The Baltimore-based power company has invited politicians and others this morning (3/1) to come see the system recently completed at a cost of $875 million.

The scrubber technology is expected to remove at least 95 percent of the 1,300 megawatt coal plant's sulfur dioxide emissions and 90 percent of its mercury emissions.  As I reported in a recent article in The Sun, there's a lot to remove - Brandon Shores and the nearby H.A. Wagner power plant together have been the nation's largest emitter of hazardous air pollutants.

Now, Constellation is saying, the scrubbers should make Brandon Shores one of the cleanest coal-burning plants of its size in the country.

One pollutant the scrubbers won't remove, though, is carbon dioxide.  A byproduct of burning coal, CO2 is the main "greenhouse" gas produced by human activities that scientific authorities say is gradually changing the earth's climate.  Though you can't see it, it's pouring out of the scrubber stack seen at left, along with the billowing white water vapor.  Brandon Shores emitted 7.8 million tons of the gas in 2008, according to government figures supplied by Constellation's John Quinn.

The scrubbers weren't supposed to deal with carbon dioxide.  They're meant to bring Constellation's plants into compliance with Maryland's Healthy Air Act, a 2006 law targeting power plant emissions that contribute to the Baltimore region's summer ozone and year-round particle air pollution problems.  The law also aims to curb releases of mercury, which can get into the food chain through fish and can cause nerve and brain damage, especially in young children.  If Constellation's scrubbers work as well as the company believes, the plant will meet or exceed the law's required reductions - for those pollutants

But the scrubbers will actually cause the plant's emissions of carbon dioxide to increase about 2.5 percent, company spokesmen say.  That's because the plant will be using some of the electricity it produces to run its scrubber equipment, and will need to burn more coal to make up for the diverted power.  Reducing the plant's contributions to climate change likely will require "carbon capture and storage," a technology that is still being tested at several power plants around the country.  Congress has yet to act on federal legislation that might require carbon dioxide reductions nationwide, but under a 2009 state law, power plants and other industrial sources of greenhouse gases in Maryland will have to reduce their emissions 25 percent by 2020.

(Thanks to Roger A. Pielke Sr., senior research scientist at the Cooperative Institutes for Research in Environmental Sciences in Boulder, CO for pointing out in his blog that I didn't mention carbon dioxide in my Sun article.)

(Baltimore Sun photo by Kenneth K. Lam)

Posted by Tim Wheeler at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)