American Carbon Registry Initiates Approval of ... Carbon Offset Methodology for Deltaic Wetland Restoration ... to unlock carbon finance potential for wetland restoration activities

http://is.gd/koCRHH

American Carbon Registry (ACR), a nonprofit enterprise of Winrock International, announces an open public comment period for a ... carbon offset methodology that will both quantify how wetland restoration work can combat climate change and provide a way to help pay for rebuilding the Gulf of Mexico’s disappearing coastal wetland. The methodology, Restoration of Degraded Deltaic Wetlands of the Mississippi Delta, was funded by Entergy Corporation and developed by Dr. Sarah K. Mack of New Orleans-based Tierra Resources LLC, with contributions from Dr. Robert R. Lane, Dr. John W. Day and Tiffany M. Potter.

The new wetland offset methodology is unique not only because it is the first carbon offset methodology to target deltaic wetland restoration, but also because it uses a modular format, which provides flexibility for numerous types of wetland restoration techniques and facilitates methodology expansion. Another key innovation of the methodology is the incorporation of hydrologic management of nutrient-rich waters as a restoration technique, including options for diversion of river water into wetland, introduction of nonpoint source runoff into wetlands and discharge of treated municipal effluent into wetlands. Avoided loss and afforestation are also included wetland restoration techniques.

The primary hurdle to implement Mississippi Delta restoration is the price tag, estimated between $10 billion for near-term restoration to $150 billion for broader restoration and protection measures. Louisiana’s Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast recently estimated that between $20 billion and $50 billion will realistically be available for funding over the next 50 years, but acknowledged a budget up to five times that size could be needed. Under the new methodology, carbon credits created by restoring wetlands can be registered and sold to help finance additional wetland restoration, Dr. Mack said.

...

A ... study .. published [September 14, 2011] by Restore America’s Estuaries, “Jobs & Dollars: Big Returns from Coastal Habitat Restoration,” [and available at http://www.estuaries.org/images/81103-RAE_17_FINAL_web.pdf] confirms that investments in coastal habitat restoration produce jobs at a higher rate than many other sectors -- including oil & gas, road infrastructure and green building retrofit projects. This study coincides with further efforts by Entergy to explore solutions to the environmental and economic impacts facing coastal wetland. In an open dialog to address mitigation of coastal stressors such as hurricanes, coastal erosion and rising sea levels, Entergy’s 2010 study “Building a Resilient Energy Gulf Coast,” produced in cooperation with America’s Energy Coast and America’s Wetland Foundation, presents a picture of what the Gulf coast will look like environmentally as well as economically by the year 2030 if no mitigation or remediation activity is undertaken.

Louisiana boasts 40 percent of the country’s coastal wetland - more than 4 million acres. Of total U.S. coastal wetland loss, 80 percent has occurred in the Mississippi Delta. An estimated 90 percent of current loss occurs in Louisiana -- the equivalent of losing one football field of wetlands every hour. The loss of Louisiana’s coastal wetlands has major national environmental and economic implications. Not only is the Mississippi Delta one of the world’s most unique and diverse ecosystems, but its wetlands and waterways contribute tens of billions of dollars to the national economy every year and support millions of jobs. Much of the U.S. depends on sustaining the navigation, flood control, energy production, and seafood production functions of the Mississippi Delta and river system. Each of those functions is currently at severe risk due to coastal wetland loss.

As a first step toward achieving the massive global GHG mitigation potential from wetland restoration, the methodology is expected to be expanded in the future for wetland restoration in other regions and other wetland restoration practices. The ACR approval process for the methodology, which includes public comment and scientific peer review, is targeted to be complete this spring.

...

The “Jobs & Dollars: Big Returns from Coastal Habitat Restoration,” report (at http://www.estuaries.org/images/81103-RAE_17_FINAL_web.pdf) found:

• Restoring our coasts can create more than 30 jobs for each million dollars invested. That’s more than twice as many jobs as the oil and gas and road construction industries combined.
• During 2010, restoration efforts for the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, and Everglades contributed $427 million in economic output and supported more than 3,200 jobs.
• The $72-million Central Wetlands Unit restoration project in New Orleans is on track to create 280 direct jobs and 400 indirect and induced jobs, for a total of 680 jobs over the project’s life.
• The restoration of Florida’s Everglades is a 4:1 return on investment.

Restoration improves coastal habitats and helps local economies by creating three different types of jobs: direct, indirect, and induced.

• Direct Jobs: People using their skills to restore damaged wetlands, shellfish beds, coral reefs and fish passages.
• Indirect Jobs: Jobs in industries that supply materials for restoration projects, such as lumber, concrete and nursery plants.
• Induced Jobs: Jobs in businesses that provide local goods and services, such as clothing and food, to people working on restoration projects.

American Carbon Registry www.AmericanCarbonRegistry.or

Press Release dated Jan. 18, 2012
Hap Tip/See also http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/calculating-the-carbon-value-of-a-swamp/?src=recg

Process analysis and economics of drinking water production from coastal aquifers containing chromophoric dissolved organic matter and bromide using nanofiltration and ozonation

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479711003422

Abstract: In regions characterized by water scarcity, such as coastal Southern California, groundwater containing chromophoric dissolved organic matter is a viable source of water supply. In the coastal aquifer of Orange County in California, seawater intrusion driven by coastal groundwater pumping increased the concentration of bromide in extracted groundwater from 0.4 mg l−1 in 2000 to over 0.8 mg l−1 in 2004. Bromide, a precursor to bromate formation is regulated by USEPA and the California Department of Health as a potential carcinogen and therefore must be reduced to a level below 10 μg l−1. This paper compares two processes for treatment of highly coloured groundwater: nanofiltration and ozone injection coupled with biologically activated carbon. The requirement for bromate removal decreased the water production in the ozonation process to compensate for increased maintenance requirements, and required the adoption of catalytic carbon with associated increase in capital and operating costs per unit volume. However, due to the absence of oxidant addition in nanofiltration processes, this process is not affected by bromide. We performed a process analysis and a comparative economic analysis of capital and operating costs for both technologies. Our results show that for the case studied in coastal Southern California, nanofiltration has higher throughput and lower specific capital and operating cost, when compared to ozone injection with biologically activate carbon. Ozone injection with biologically activated carbon, compared to nanofiltration, has 14% higher capital cost and 12% higher operating costs per unit water produced while operating at the initial throughput. Due to reduced ozone concentration required to accommodate for bromate reduction, the ozonation process throughput is reduced and the actual cost increase (per unit water produced) is 68% higher for capital cost and 30% higher for operations.

Highlights:
► Southern California’s coastal aquifer has Chromophoric Dissolved Organic Matter.
► We analysed two processes for CDOM removal, nanofiltration and ozonation.
► The ozonation process must be amended to reduce bromate by-products.
► The effect of bromate formation is an increased cost for ozonation.
► Overall, nanofiltration has lower operating cost, for the case studied.

by R. Sobhani 1, R. McVicker 2, C. Spangenberg 3 and D. Rosso 4
1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2175, USA
2. Mesa Consolidated Water District, Costa Mesa, CA 92627, USA
3. Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA 92618, USA
4. Urban Water Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2175, USA
Journal of Environmental Management via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 93, Issue 1; January, 2012; Pages 209–217

Keywords: Chromophoric dissolved organic matter; Nanofiltration; Ozonation; Economic analysis; Seawater intrusion; Bromate

Taxpayer and Environmental Groups: Corps of Engineers Uses New Recipe to Cook the Books – Again – To Push Wasteful Delaware River Deepening Project - Report Released on Updated Economic Analysis

http://taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&type=Project&proj_id=5058

Responding to renewed economic claims for Deepening the Delaware River, a coalition of taxpayer, community, and environmental organizations issued a new independent analysis they say proves once again that the deepening project is an economic loser. The groups issued the analysis and an accompanying report titled “Army Corps Cooks the Books Again,” in response to a May 2011 analysis issued by the Army Corps of Engineers.

“The Army Corps once again tried to mislead Congress and the public about the deepening project – a renewed analysis by Dr. Bob Stearns clearly demonstrates how the Army Corps manipulated their calculations so as to present a false picture for the project,” said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper. “The inappropriate calculation was not hard to find. The Corps’ own report provides the analysis and numbers. Without deepening, shippers will use the feeder port approach which is far cheaper than trucking, and when all matters are considered, is also cheaper than deepening. The Corps’ assessment pretends that without deepening, shippers would use the far more expensive trucking option to get goods to the Philadelphia area markets. But the Corps’ own practices and procedures make clear that the shipping alternative is the best alternative and the one that would be selected, thereby supporting and encouraging port jobs without the need for a nearly $300 million, environmentally devastating deepening project.”

According to the new Cooked the Books report, correction of the shipping vs trucking error alone reduces the benefit-cost ratio for the project to, at best 1.1 (or to below 1 to 1, depending on a shipping diversion assumption) -- far below the 1.64 claimed by the Army Corps’ May 2011 report. Supplemental information in the report provided by the coalition of organizations identifies a number of additional errors they say, when included in the calculation, revive the GAO finding that deepening would provide less than a dollar of benefit for every $1 of cost paid for by the taxpayers.

“The Corps’ economic analysis deserves to be on a Chinese menu under twice-cooked pork. The errors were too obvious and too basic to be a mistake” says Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. “But more importantly, the new report is being used to justify renewed funding for a project that doesn’t meet the Federal Government’s basic criteria for ensuring tax dollars are invested only in those projects that will generate clear economic value for the country.”

“This new economic analysis makes it clear that the Delaware River Deepening project is an economic looser, which poses substantial environmental risks. The Army Corps needs to take a hard look at its project review practices if projects like this, that don’t meet the Corps’ own basic economic standards, are getting the green light,” asserts George Sorvalis, Coordinator with the Water Protection Network.

In a report issued in April, 2010, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued its third challenge to the reliability and accuracy of the Army Corps economic claims for deepening (the first GAO report being issued in 2002, the second challenge in the form of Congressional testimony given in 2006).

The Army Corps 2011 report was issued in apparent response to the less than glowing, GAO 2010 report. The May 2011 Army Corps analysis was its 8th economic analysis of the deepening. “But no one ever learned of this report or got an opportunity to review it until we secured the report through a Freedom of Information Act request,” says van Rossum. “As soon as we received a copy we pursued an independent review of its claims. We think our findings clearly demonstrate why the Army Corps felt the need to keep this newest analysis an apparent secret – because it’s clear that once again they cooked the books, a practice far too common with the Army Corps and one that demeans the entire federal government.”

New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Proposes Enhanced On-Site Stormwater Controls for New Construction Projects to Improve Harbor Water Quality

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/press_releases/11-91pr.shtml
On September 29, 2011 Environmental Protection Commissioner Carter Strickland proposed a rule requiring new construction and major building alteration projects to capture more stormwater runoff, provide additional capacity in the combined sewer system and reduce street flooding. New York City, like other older urban areas, is largely serviced by a combined sewer system where stormwater and wastewater are carried through a single pipe. During heavy storms, the system can exceed its capacity and must discharge a mix of stormwater and wastewater — called a combined sewer overflow, or CSO — into New York Harbor. Enhancing an already existing requirement, the rule will employ a wide range of on-site stormwater control techniques to all new development, redevelopment and major alterations in combined sewer areas. For a typical site over 5,000 square feet, DEP estimates that the rule will limit stormwater discharge to 10% of its present permitted flow to the combined sewer system using cost-effective detention, infiltration, and conservation techniques. This rule will lead to on-site control systems that are projected to reduce combined sewer overflows by as much as 800 million gallons over the next 20 years based on historic development trends. No existing homes or developments will be impacted by the new rule. The rule delivers a key component of the NYC Green Infrastructure Plan announced by Mayor Bloomberg last September.

"Combined sewer overflows remain one of the greatest challenges to water quality in New York Harbor," said Commissioner Strickland. "Our Green Infrastructure Plan seeks to control water at the source to keep it out of our sewers while balancing compliance costs. Through several years of outreach to the real estate, development and environmental communities, we have received many comments to adopt innovative and cost-effective techniques, and the final rule allows additional opportunities to use infiltration and recycling systems to meet control requirements."

The new proposed rule will reduce the amount of stormwater runoff discharged from new development projects as part of DEP's existing permitting processes. The current rule is based on a number of different factors such as existing sewer design criteria, property type, size, and drainage area of the lot. The new rule will reduce current limits for runoff to 10% of present permitted flows through the use of innovative control systems, such as blue roofs, green roofs, or subsurface gravel beds and stormwater chambers. For example, a typical one-acre site currently allowed to release 2.5 cubic feet per second under existing standards, will now be required to detain and release runoff at 0.25 cubic feet per second through some combination of on-site stormwater control systems. The cost impact of the new standard on a project's development is estimated to be an additional 0.3% to 1.5% of total costs.

The rule was developed through several task force meetings DEP conducted with the Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability and its partners across city agencies. Over the past two years, DEP has received input from building industry which includes real estate, development and professional applicants, and environmental organizations, including the Real Estate Board of New York, the Regional Planning Association, American Institute of Architects, Buildings Sustainability Board, Citizens for Affordable Housing, US Green Buildings Council and the Green Infrastructure Steering Committee. Based on extensive feedback, the rule credits infiltration into soil and recycling for on-site use, which can reduce the size of stormwater control systems.

To assist with the implementation of the new rule, DEP will release a companion document, Guidelines for the Design and Construction of Stormwater Management Systems, offering guidance to the development community and applicants with the selection, planning, design and construction of on-site stormwater detention systems. The manual was developed in consultation with the Department of Buildings, and will feature guidance on siting, design and construction considerations for various stormwater control systems, as well as operation and maintenance recommendations. The guidelines will be continually updated to reflect the latest technology and best practices.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) www.nyc.gov/dep

September 29, 2011

U.S. Treasury Building Becomes Oldest in World to Receive LEED Certification

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/21/treasury-green-our-favorite-color-well-take-leed-gold
... The Treasury Building – which dates back to the 19th century and is located right next door to the White House – received Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold certification from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) at a ceremony on [December 21, 2011....]

According to the USGBC, the Treasury Building is believed to be the oldest building in the world to receive LEED certification....

LEED is a leading international standard for the design, construction, and operation of high-performance green buildings. The Treasury Building received its LEED Gold certification based on a number of green construction and operation features, including:

• Increasing the use of natural day lighting to reduce energy consumption;
• Establishing sustainable cleaning and landscape programs;
• Developing and implementing advanced control and management of the heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems;
• Conducting waste stream audits to benchmark recycling programs and identify opportunities to maximize material conservation;
• Creating a green procurement program for materials, equipment and services purchased
• Increasing occupant space utilization;
• Augmenting alternate transportation means; and
• Establishing enhanced utility metering for improved systems management

... Going green saves green for taxpayers. Project results, which are producing an estimated $3.5 million in energy and lease cost savings annually, include:

• A 43 percent decrease in the use of potable water
• A 7 percent decrease in electrical usage
• A 53 percent decrease in the use of steam
• The addition of 164 additional workstations within the building

The fact that ... the unique historical and architectural features of the Treasury Building [is significant].  The Treasury Building is more than two city blocks long and was constructed over a period of 33 years between 1836 and 1869. The east and center wings – which comprise the oldest portion of the structure – were designed by Robert Mills, architect of the Washington Monument, and were built between 1836 to 1842. It’s the third-oldest federal building in Washington D.C., after the White House and the U.S. Capitol, and was named a National Historic Landmark in 1972.

..The improvements ... are part of a broader Administration-wide effort, which includes President Obama’s recent $2 billion commitment to energy upgrades of federal buildings using long term energy savings to pay for up-front costs, at no cost to taxpayers.

... Treasury’s environmental initiatives represent just a few of the steps ... taken to cut waste and improve efficiency.

• [The] transition to electronic payments for federal beneficiaries and retirees ... will save more than $500 million over the first five years. That also has a significant environmental benefit by converting approximately 135 million paper check payments to electronic payments per year.
• Last week, Vice President Biden and Secretary Geithner announced that the United States Mint is suspending production of surplus Presidential $1 Coins for circulation, which will save at least $50 million annually over the next several years.
• The Department’s work to increase e-filing of tax returns will save more than $100 million over five years.
• A set of projects [being implemented] to consolidate IT services will save an estimated $125 million over five years.
• Earlier this year, Treasury received “green” ratings across-the-board on its energy and sustainability scorecard from the Office of Management and Budget and White House Council on Environmental Quality.

by Dan Tangherlini, U.S. Department of Treasury, Assistant Secretary for Management, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Performance Officer, and Director of the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
The White House Blog http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog
December 21, 2011
via/Hat Tip: Susan Axelrod, Clean Techies/Linked In http://tiny.cc/rmtte

New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Launches Program To Improve Services, Lower Costs and Maintain Status ...

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/press_releases/11-98pr.shtml 

On November 7, 2011 the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) launched a new program, Operational Excellence, or OpX, to help make DEP the safest, most effective, cost-efficient, and transparent water utility in the nation. The program will enhance services, result in environmental benefits, and reduce costs for the nine million New Yorkers who rely on DEP for water and wastewater services. Veolia Water ("Veolia"), an international expert in water and wastewater utilities, has been hired as a consultant to develop recommendations to streamline workflows, boost productivity, identify opportunities for efficiency gains, and keep future water rate increases as low as possible. As the nation's largest municipal water and wastewater utility, DEP currently spends roughly $1.2 billion annually on operations and maintenance and aims to achieve $100 to $200 million in annual savings through the program. The innovative incentive-based agreement with Veolia Water delivers access to a worldwide network of water and wastewater services and technologies while ensuring continued government control, decision-making authority, and ownership, as well as public-employee status for DEP employees.

... DEP Commissioner Carter Strickland said "Faced with unfunded mandates that have driven up costs, as well as the need for reinvesting in our basic infrastructure to ensure reliability for the next generation, and our desire to keep water rates in check as much as possible, now it is our turn to take our agency to the next level. The Operational Excellence program pairs us with a firm that brings a comprehensive portfolio of best management practices, a track record of boosting productivity while reducing expenses across the globe, and all while protecting existing workforces. Through this new innovative partnership, teams of DEP employees will work with Veolia to look for efficiencies across the board in operations and maintenance and then implement the best recommendations over the next four years while protecting our existing workforce and maintaining our level of service. We also know that the success of this program requires the help of the unions that represent our nearly 6,000 employees; so in addition to briefing them ahead of time, we will be working closely with them as the program moves forward. Bold steps like these are the responsible thing to do to lessen the burden on our 835,000 customers who have been absorbing several years of significant water rate increases."
...
The company's selection followed a Request for Proposals issued in April by the New York City Water Board and a competitive review process that focused on a contractor's ability to assess all aspects of agency operations for potential improvements, including labor productivity and processes, inventory management, chemical purchasing and usage, sludge digestion and disposal, and energy efficiency and management. The Veolia team includes McKinsey & Company and ARCADIS, both serving as subcontractors.DEP will draw from the Veolia team's portfolio of best management practices, including implementing system-wide improvements and saving up to 15% of operations and maintenance costs for utilities including Berliner Wasserbetriebe in Berlin, Germany and Thames Water in London, UK.  Veolia is the global water industry leader, managing more than 5,200 water facilities and 3,200 wastewater facilities around the world.
...
The OpX program is divided into two phases. First, DEP and its partner Veolia will conduct an initial evaluation and recommendation phase that will result in a final report in 2012 of recommendations on how DEP can improve productivity and reduce costs. Based on that report, DEP has the ability to accept or reject any of the proposed operational changes and cost-saving measures. Improvements that DEP chooses will be implemented over a four-year period.  Compensation for work performed includes a combination of a fixed fee and an incentive-based compensation that is calculated based on recurring savings achieved and documented.

The main objectives of the program are to:

• Review current operations and maintenance for potential improvements with a particular focus on energy usage and production opportunities, chemical usage and pricing, labor productivity, inventory management, and optimal sludge processes.
• Recommend implementable measures to improve and/or streamline operations and maintenance, increasing efficiencies, enhancing productivity, and reducing costs.
• Support public outreach, legislative initiatives, and other processes required to implement recommendations.
• Work with DEP staff to manage the implementation of the recommended initiatives.

Improving operational productivity and efficiency is a part of several goals outlined in Strategy 2011-2014, a far-reaching strategic plan that lays out 100 distinct initiatives to make DEP the safest, most efficient, cost-effective, and transparent water utility in the nation. The new plan, the product of nearly one year of analysis and outreach, builds on PlaNYC, Mayor Bloomberg's sustainability blueprint for New York City. The plan is available on DEP's website at www.nyc.gov/dep.
...
DEP manages the city's water supply, providing more than one billion gallons of water each day to more than nine million residents, including eight million in New York City. The water is delivered from a watershed that extends more than 125 miles from the city, comprising 19 reservoirs and three controlled lakes. Approximately 7,000 miles of water mains, tunnels and aqueducts bring water to homes and businesses throughout the five boroughs, and 7,400 miles of sewer lines and 95 pump stations take wastewater to 14 in-city treatment plants. DEP employs nearly 6,000 employees, including almost 1,000 in the upstate watershed. DEP has a robust capital program, with a planned $8.9 billion in investments over the next five years.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection www.nyc.gov/dep
Press Release dated November 7, 2011

A review of EU bio-economic models for fisheries: The value of a diversity of models

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X11001382
Abstract: The lessons learned from a review of thirteen existing European bio-economic models used in the evaluation of EU policies are presented. How these models compare and differ in terms of their biological and economic components, the integration between the components, which indicators are selected and how they are used, are described and analysed. The article concludes that the multitude of construction differences reflects the necessity of adapting the modelling approach to answer different questions. Since real life questions in fisheries are so diverse, answering them requires a diversity of models.

Highlights:
► BEMs are used to understand the feedback between human activity and natural resources.
► When a model is built initial attention must be given to the fishery management problem.
► The simulation of fisherman behaviour is not extensively included in the models.
► A tradeoff between simplicity and usefulness emerges when integrated models are used.
► New research questions will stimulate the development of new models.

by Raúl Prellezo 1, Paolo Accadia 2, Jesper L. Andersen 3, Bo S. Andersen 4, Erik Buisman 5, Alyson Little 6, J. Rasmus Nielsen 4, Jan Jaap Poos 7, Jeff Powell 5, Christine Röckmann 7
1. AZTI-Tecnalia, Txatxarramendi Ugartea Z/G, 48395 Sukarrieta, Spain; Tel.: +34 94 6574000; fax: +34 94 6572555.
2. IREPA Onlus Via S. Leonardo, Traversa Migliaro, 84131 Salerno, Italy
3. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, Environmental and Natural Resource Economics Unit, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, Denmark
4. National Institute of Aquatic Resources, DTU Aqua, Technical University of Denmark, Jaegersborg Allé 1, 2920 Charlottenlund, Denmark
5. LEI Wageningen UR, PO Box 29703, 2502 LS Den Haag, The Netherlands
6. CEFAS, Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR33 0HT, United Kingdom
7. IMARES Wageningen UR, Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies, PO Box 68, 1970 AB IJmuiden, The Netherlands
Marine Policy via Elsevier Science Direct www.sciencedirect.com
Volume 36, Issue 2; March, 2012; Pages 423-431
Keywords: Bio-economic models; European region; Model characteristics; Review

Valuing Green Infrastructure in Portland, Oregon

http://www.webmeets.com/files/papers/AERE/2011/74/GreenStreets-5-24-2011.pdf
Abstract: This study uses the hedonic price method to examine if proximity, abundance, and characteristics of green street facilities affect the sale price of single-family residential properties in the city of Portland, Oregon. Different methods for measuring proximity and abundance are explored with distance based on street network, and abundance of green streets at the census tract and census block level, producing statistically significant results. Sale prices increase as distance from the nearest green street facility increases although the magnitude of this effect is small. Preliminary results find that older green streets (10 years+), and those with a large number of trees (7 or more), have a positive effect on the sale price of nearby properties.

Over the past 20 years Portland has invested $1.4 billion in physical infrastructure projects to reduce combined sewer overflows. These projects, which are scheduled to be completed in December 2011, will reduce the number of overflows to the Willamette River to an average of four times each winter and once every third summer (Portland Bureau of Environmental Services 2011). Projects are funded, in large part, by Portland’s combined sewer/water bills, which are amongst the highest in the country (Frank 2011). Further rate increases to fund large capital projects may not be politically feasible, so in 2008 the city launched a new strategy, the $55 million “Grey to Green” program, to control stormwater runoff. Program goals include planting 33,000 yard trees and 50,000 street trees, adding 43 acres of ecoroofs, controlling invasive plant species, purchasing over 400 acres of natural areas, and constructing 920 new green street facilities.
...
Green streets are a low-impact development technique that use “vegetated facilities to manage stormwater runoff at its source” and include curb extensions, street planters, and rain gardens as well as “simple” green streets, which involve changes to existing planting areas between curbs and sidewalks.... Additional benefits attributed to these facilities include increased property values, traffic calming, better bike access, enhanced pedestrian safety, and added green space and wildlife habitat. These facilities “are more cost-effective than piping stormwater to a treatment plant” ...and are increasingly being promoted by city managers as an effective means for controlling stormwater runoff.

While green space and wildlife habitat have been estimated to increase the sale price of single-family residential properties (Donovan and Butry 2010; Mahan, Polasky, and Adams 2000; Netusil 2006), literature examining the relationship between green street facilities and the sale price of single-family residential properties is extremely limited. Ward et al. (2008) estimate that properties located in low-impact development project areas in Seattle, Washington sold for 3.5-5 percent more than properties in the same zip code located outside project areas. Williams and Wise (2009) reach the opposite conclusion finding that lots in Gainesville, Florida with low-impact development stormwater systems are valued less than lots that use conventional approaches.
...
Home characteristics are of the expected sign and magnitude across specifications—a property’s sale price is estimated to increase at a diminishing rate as lot size and building square footage increase. Additional full and half bathrooms, increases in elevation (a proxy for views), and neighborhood characteristics such as percentage white and median income at the census tract level, are also found to have a significantly positive effect on sale price. Land cover variables on a property and in surrounding buffers are included to avoid omitted variable bias because green streets are often located in areas with a high percentage of impervious surface area.

Tree canopy on a property, and in surrounding buffers, is found to have a positive but diminishing effect on a property’s sale price; water, which is only present in the 200-foot to ¼ mile and ¼ mile to ½ mile buffers, has a large and significant effect on sale price.
...
The economic magnitude of proximity, however, is small—increasing a property’s distance from a green street by 1,000 feet is estimated to increase its sale price from $430 (1/4 mile street network) to $851 (1/4 mile Euclidean).
...
The EPA estimates that between $331 and $450 billion of investment is needed over a 20-year period (2000 to 2019) to replace or update the existing sewer infrastructure in the United States.
...
by Noelwah R. Netusil 1, Zachary Levin 1 and Vivek Shandas 2
1. Reed College, Department of Economics, 3203 SE Woodstock Boulevard, Portland, Oregon 97202
2. Portland State University, Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning, Portland, Oregon 97201
Association of Environmental and Resource Economists www.aere.org/ 2011 Summer Conference Seattle, Washington http://www.webmeets.com/AERE/2011/
June 10, 2011
Keywords: low impact development; green streets; hedonic price method; stormwater; Portland, Oregon

Metalliferous sediments in the Atlantis II Deep—Assessing the geological and economic resource potential and legal constraints

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420711000559
Abstract: Projected increases in demand and thus increasing metal prices have brought the exploration and exploitation of marine mineral resources back into focus. The Atlantis II Deep, located in the central Red Sea between Saudi Arabia and Sudan, is one of the largest marine sulfide deposits known, with high concentrations of metals such as zinc, copper, silver and gold. However, little is known about the economic potential of marine minerals as well as the legal constraints. Our geological assessment shows that the deep is similar in grades and scale to large land-based deposits. Its economic potential is far from negligible. The total present value of possible gross revenues for the four metals zinc, copper, silver and gold ranges from 3.03 to 5.29 billion US$, depending on the assumptions made concerning future price development, mass calculation and discount rate. From a legal perspective, a general duty to cooperate in the exploration and exploitation of non-living resources located in disputed maritime areas is identified in both customary international law and in UNCLOS. It is submitted that a joint development agreement is one means of ensuring compliance with this duty in general and in the case of the Atlantis II Deep in particular.

Highlights:
► We calculate the masses of Zn, Cu, Mn and Ag in A2D in depth slices down to 14 m.
► Mass calculations are based on 480 cores from the Saudi-Sudanese Red Sea Commission.
► The PV of possible gross revenues of A2D resources ranges from 3.03 to 5.29 bn US$.
► JDA as a useful way to ensure the legal duty to cooperate in resource use is upheld.

by Christine Bertram 1, Anna Krätschell 2, Killian O’Brien 3, Warner Brückmann 2, Alexander Proelss 4, Katrin Rehdanz 1 and, 5
Resources Policy via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com Volume 36, Issue 4; December, 2011; Pages 315-329
1. Kiel Institute for the World Economy, (IfW) Hindenburgufer 66, D-24105 Kiel, Germany; Tel.: +49 431 8814 261.
2. IFM-GEOMAR, Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences, Kiel, Germany
3. Academy of European Law (ERA), Trier, Germany
4. Department of Law, University of Trier, Trier, Germany
5. Department of Economics, Christian-Albrechts-University at Kiel, Kiel, Germany
Keywords: Atlantis II Deep; Deep-sea mining; Joint development scheme; Metalliferous sediments; Resource potential; Saudi-Sudanese Red Sea Commission

RepRisk's Water Scarcity Report

http://www.reprisk.com/downloads/mccreports/22/Water Scarcity - FINAL.pdf
RepRisk has released a new special report on companies and projects involved in Water Scarcity issues. RepRisk has been tracking the overuse and pollution of water resources by industrial firms. Based on negative published stakeholder sentiment, the most controversial include: Halliburton, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, Encana, Barrick Gold, Black Mountain Resources and BHP Billiton.

Although RepRisk found criticism of overuse of water related to the Food and Beverage, Forestry, Paper, Alternative Energy and Biofuel industries, this report focuses on three industries over the past twelve months to analyze the impact of their operations on local communities and ecosystems. These industries are: Mining, Utilities and Oil & Gas. The Reprisk Reputation Risk Index (RRI®) and its trend are provided over a two year period for each sector.

Mining has been criticized for using vast quantities of underground water and for discharging toxic waste into freshwater sources. Indigenous groups have organized protests against companies in the Utilities sector, claiming that power plants are destroying their communities by drying out their sources of drinking water and irrigation. The ‘fracking’ technique and tar sands extraction method used by the Oil and Gas sector have been harshly criticized for using vast quantities of water and for contaminating underground water reserves.

Companies face a number of risks related to water scarcity and contamination. These include increased regulation or even the nationalization of water resources, loss of license to operate and/or lack of water supplies required for production. They may also face litigation, public backlash, protests, or shareholder resolutions, leading to reputational damage and ensuing financial loss.
...
According to the UN, nearly 900 million people have no access to clean drinkable water, almost 1.8 billion live in areas where water is scarce, and a further 1.6 billion live in countries, which lack the infrastructure to extract water from natural sources. The World Bank calculates that by 2030, water demand will exceed supply by 40 percent, as a growing world population demands more water for agricultural, industrial and personal use.
...
According to UNESCO, industry currently accounts for approximately 72 percent of global usage but this volume is rapidly increasing as emerging markets become more industrialized.
...
There have been repeated warnings that Barrick Gold’s Pascua Lama and Veladero mines in Argentina are reducing the size of the glaciers located in the central Andes. In July 2011, opponents of the company’s Pueblo Viejo Mine, in the Dominican Republic alleged that it would generate 6,736 million cubic meters of wastewater annually.
...
In the US, the coal-fired, Merrimack Power plant has been criticized for using 287 million gallons of water a day and for causing water pollution.... In the Philippines, the Davao Coal Plant will allegedly extract at least 1,500 cubic meters of freshwater a day from the city’s aquifers and the Fukushima accident had a massive impact on water sources in Japan.

To read the full report click here: http://www.reprisk.com/downloads/mccreports/22/Water%20Scarcity%20-%20FINAL.pdf

About RepRisk
RepRisk™ monitors environmental, social and governance issues. Through this monitoring, our analysts cover negative news in 13 languages on more than 20,000 listed and unlisted companies. The coverage of companies is not limited and the data is updated daily. The criticism on companies from thousands of publicly available sources is collected, analyzed and quantified by the analysts. This results in summaries describing the relevant accusations specific to the companies and projects in each article, together with the RepRisk Index (RRI), a unique quant based indicator of reputational risks. These risks are specifically related to a company’s, project’s, sector’s or country’s environmental footprint, community and employee issues, human rights violations, corruption, fraud, and tax evasion issues, among others.

On November 29, 2010 RepRisk released “RepRisk 2012”, the first enterprise edition of its reputation risk management tool. This software as a service (SaaS) application, previously only provided to financial institutions, can be used to proactively monitor environmental, social and governance (ESG) risk exposure for multinational corporations, sectors or countries.

On November 28, 2011 SunGard added up-to-date environmental, social and governance (ESG) data for publicly listed companies and projects around the world to its MarketMap global market data terminal via an integration with RepRisk AG. The information gives MarketMap users the ability to identify controversial companies across sectors and countries and to compare companies’ ratings with their peers and their sectors.

On November 11, 2011 RepRisk was nominated as a finalist for the OG25 2011 Innovative Green Start-up Award in the US. The 3rd annual green startup competition recognized twenty-five of the most innovative eco-startups. OG25 Innovative Green Startup finalists were showcased on November 11 at the Annual Opportunity Green Conference, held in Los Angeles.

REPRISK www.reprisk.com
Press Release November 10, 2011

Offset markets for nutrient and sediment discharges in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed: Policy tradeoffs and potential steps forward

http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/WPNumber/2011-05
Abstract: Considerable interest has been expressed recently in prospects for water quality trading markets between nutrient sources in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Allowing such flexibility in response to the terms of recently announced total maximum daily load (TMDL) restrictions might considerably decrease costs of compliance with the TMDLs. Before an effective and efficient market for offsets can be established, however, certain preconditions must be met. In particular, there must be means by which nutrients can be measured, allowances can be assigned, and limits on nutrient discharges enforced. In this paper we consider some factors that may affect the realization of these preconditions. A recurrent theme is that there are tradeoffs in policy design. A regime that imposes tight restrictions on those who are eligible to trade may also limit the cost savings that might be realized from trading. On the other hand, a regime that maximizes market participation might fail fully to achieve the environmental goals of an offset or trading policy. We conclude with some recommendations for steps that might be taken to initiate limited markets in nutrient and sediment discharges. These markets might then be expanded as experience is gained and methods developed to assure improved market performance.

by Andrew Manale, Cynthia Morgan, Glenn Sheriff and David Simpson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) www.EPA.gov National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/homepage
Working Paper Number: 2011-05; August 15, 2011
Keywords: water quality trading; offsets; transaction costs; adverse selection; leakage; additionality; monitoring; Chesapeake Bay; nutrients

Learning Too Late of the Perils in Gas Well Leases

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/drilling-down-fighting-over-oil-and-gas-well-leases.html
After Scott Ely and his father talked with salesmen from an energy company about signing the lease allowing gas drilling on their land in northeastern Pennsylvania, he said he felt certain it required the company to leave the property as good as new. So Mr. Ely said he was surprised several years later when the drilling company, Cabot Oil and Gas, informed them that rather than draining and hauling away the toxic drilling sludge stored in large waste ponds on the property, it would leave the waste, cover it with dirt and seed the area with grass. He knew that waste pond liners can leak, seeping contaminated waste.

Americans have signed millions of leases allowing companies to drill for oil and natural gas on their land in recent years. But some of these landowners — often in rural areas, and eager for quick payouts — are finding out too late what is, and what is not, in the fine print.

Energy company officials say that standard leases include language that protects landowners. But a review of more than 111,000 leases, addenda and related documents by The New York Times suggests otherwise:
¶ Fewer than half the leases require companies to compensate landowners for water contamination after drilling begins. And only about half the documents have language that lawyers suggest should be included to require payment for damages to livestock or crops.
¶ Most leases grant gas companies broad rights to decide where they can cut down trees, store chemicals, build roads and drill. Companies are also permitted to operate generators and spotlights through the night near homes during drilling.
¶ In the leases, drilling companies rarely describe to landowners the potential environmental and other risks that federal laws require them to disclose in filings to investors.
¶ Most leases are for three or five years, but at least two-thirds of those reviewed by The Times allow extensions without additional approval from landowners. If landowners have second thoughts about drilling on their land or want to negotiate for more money, they may be out of luck.

The leases — obtained through open records requests — are mostly from gas-rich areas in Texas, but also in Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

In Pennsylvania, Colorado and West Virginia, some landowners have had to spend hundreds of dollars a month to buy bottled water or maintain large tanks, known as water buffaloes, for drinking water in their front yards....
Thousands of landowners in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Texas have joined class action lawsuits claiming that they were paid less than they expected because gas companies deducted costs like hauling chemicals to the well site or transporting the gas to market.
...
To be sure, many landowners have earned small fortunes from drilling leases. Last year, natural gas companies paid more than $1.6 billion in lease and bonus payments to Pennsylvania landowners, according to a report commissioned by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry trade group. Chesapeake Energy, one of the largest natural gas companies, has paid more than $183.8 million in royalties in Texas this year, according to its Web site. Much of the money has gone to residents in rural areas where jobs are scarce and farmers and ranchers have struggled to stay afloat....
...
At least eight states specifically require companies to compensate landowners for damage to their properties or to negotiate with them about where wells will be drilled, even if the lease does not provide those protections.
...
Some landmen show up in poorer areas shortly before the holidays, offering cash on the spot for signing a lease. They might offer thousands of dollars per acre as a bonus to be paid shortly after the lease is signed. Royalties, which usually run between 12.5 percent and 20 percent of what the companies make for selling the gas, can mean tens of thousands of dollars per year for landowners.
...
In 2005, [Dave] Beinlich and his wife, Karen, signed a lease for $2 an acre per year for five years on 117 acres in Sullivan County in north-central Pennsylvania. They soon realized they had gotten far less money than their neighbors, so they planned on negotiating a new lease when theirs expired in 2010. A day before their lease term ended, no well had been drilled on their land, but the gas company parked a bulldozer nearby and started to survey an access road. A company official informed them that by moving equipment to the site, Chief Oil and Gas was preparing to drill and was therefore allowed to extend the lease indefinitely.

Lawyers say that drilling leases are not like other contracts. “You’re not buying a refrigerator or signing a car note,” said David McMahon, a lease lawyer in Charleston, W.Va., and co-founder of the West Virginia Surface Owners’ Rights Organization, adding that once a well is drilled, it can produce gas for decades, locking landowners into the lease terms. “With a gas lease, you’re permitting industrial activity in your backyard, and you’re starting a relationship that will affect the quality of living for you and your grandchildren for decades,” he said. Mr. McMahon and other lease lawyers say that unlike many contracts, oil and gas leases are covered by few consumer protection laws, in part because drilling has been most common in states with less regulation.
...
“When it comes to negotiation skills and understanding of lease terms, there is a gaping inequality between the average landman and the average citizen sitting across the table,” said Chris Csikszentmihalyi, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who created a Web site last year called the Landman Report Card that allows landowners to review landmen’s professionalism and tactics.

Some lawyers also say that there are major differences between what drilling companies tell landowners and what they must disclose to investors.
...
“It’s been one expense after another since our water went bad, and the company only has to cover part of it,” said Ronald Carter, 72, of Montrose, Pa. Mr. Carter and his wife, Jean, said they signed a lease in 2006 for a one-time fee of $25 per acre on their 75 acres and annual royalty payments of 12.5 percent. The Carters live on $3,500 a month, including the $1,500 per month they average in gas royalties. But they had to spend $7,000 to install a water purifier when their drinking supply became contaminated in 2009 after drilling near their property. The Carters joined a lawsuit with about a dozen neighbors ...
...
by Ian Urbina and Jo Craven McGinty
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/drilling-down-fighting-over-oil-and-gas-well-leases.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
December 1, 2011