An Exciting Semester with the EAG

This piece appeared in the September 7th issue of Broadside in the GMU Environmental Action Group's weekly column, the Mason Ecosphere.

Mason Ecosphere
Jason Von Kundra

From everyone here in the GMU Environmental Action Group (EAG), we welcome you to campus. The EAG is honored to continue writing our weekly column, the Mason Ecosphere in Broadside this semester.

In addition to having more of our usual hikes, movie nights, and famous dance parties, this fall the EAG is running three big campaigns: ending mountaintop removal coal mining, advocating for more sustainable foods on campus, and passing the Patriot Green Fund.

The EAG has worked on ending mountaintop removal for the past two years and will continue to work on the issue until this social and environmental devastation stops. Mountaintop removal is a form of surface mining where coal companies clear-cut forests on mountains, blow up the mountaintops with explosives, and dump the waste containing heavy metals in valleys and streams. This practice is destroying mountains, watersheds, and communities throughout Appalachia. The EAG is organizing a screening of the documentary film Coal Country and a panel of experts on mountaintop removal. Then the EAG will be taking action with thousands of other concerned citizens involved in the struggle by participating in Appalachia Rising, a mass mobilization in the District of Colombia on September 25th through the 27th where people will call for an end to this destructive practice.

Sustainable foods is also an important issue which connects to every student that eats on campus. The EAG is starting a new campaign this semester in which students will advocate for more local, organic, vegetarian, and vegan food options. We are also looking at the entire environmental impact of our dining service including packaging, shipping, and the disposal of food.

Finally, the EAG is campaigning to pass policy through the administration that will provide funding for a green endowment, sustainable capital improvements, and research funding for student projects related to sustainability. The Patriot Green Fund, a proposal currently being considered by the university is expected to be presented to the Board of Visitors in the spring. If passed, students will soon see solar panels and wind turbines on campus that will help Mason to reach its goal of climate neutrality. President Alan Merten committed George Mason to climate neutrality by signing the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment in 2007.

To join the EAG or get more information, check out our website at gmu.edu/org/environment and make sure to join the Facebook group. We meet every Wednesday at 7:30pm in the Johnson Center Meeting Room A.

EPA Holds First Public Hearing on Coal Ash Proposal

On Monday, August 30th, the Environmental Protection Agency held its first public hearing on a proposal to address risks of unsafe coal ash disposal. The EPA is proposing an unprecedented national rule to ensure the safe disposal and management of coal ash from coal-fired power plants. Students from George Mason, Virginia Tech, and University of Maryland joined hundreds of other citizens at the hearing in Arlington, VA to deliver statements in support of strict regulation of this hazardous waste.

Coal is dirty from mining to burning. Coal ash, a byproduct of the combustion of coal at power plants contains contaminants such as mercury, cadmium and arsenic, which are associated with cancer and various other serious health effects. Coal ash is disposed of in liquid form at large surface impoundments and in solid form at landfills. The dangers associated with structurally unsafe coal ash impoundments came to national attention in 2008 when an impoundment holding disposed waste ash broke open, creating a massive spill in Kingston that covered millions of cubic yards of land and river. The spill displaced residents, required hundreds of millions of dollars in cleanup costs and caused widespread environmental damage.

In testimony at the hearing, GMU student Emily Miles criticized the coal industry for “continually putting profits over people”. She urged the EPA to regulate the coal industry to limit their destruction. “As a concerned citizen, I am here today to tell the EPA to do its job and protect people and the environment.” Kara Dodson, a student at Virginia Tech working on their Beyond Coal Campaign, described the negative health effects that coal ash from her campus’ coal-fired power plant has on students. Jason Von Kundra, an earth science major at Mason, delivered a statement urging the EPA to put stricter regulation on the coal industry to embrace the “clean energy economy that our country and our president are calling for”.

Six more hearing on the proposed rule to address coal ash are scheduled for September. Public comments may also be submitted by email to rcra-docket@epa.gov and should be identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640.

Three Mason Students Join Others in Creative Sit-In at EPA Headquarters to Call for Stronger Action on Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining

WASHINGTON— Today, activists with the Rainforest Action Network staged sit-in at the EPA headquarters to demand stronger protection for Appalachia’s drinking water and an end to the devastating practice of mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining. Three of the activists inside the EPA building are Mason students including Allison Rutledge and Jason Von Kundra.

After entering the EPA building, activists sat down in the center of the lobby, locked themselves together with metal ‘lock boxes,’ and began to play West Virginia’s adopted state song, John Denver’s ‘Take me Home, Country Roads,’ with intermittent sounds of Appalachia’s mountains being blown apart by MTR explosives spliced into the song. An additional activist climbed to the top of the EPA front door on Constitution Ave and hung a banner reading: ‘Blowing up mountains for coal contaminates Appalachia’s water, Stop MTR.’

“We’re sitting down inside the EPA to demand the EPA stand up to protect Appalachia’s precious drinking water, historic mountains and public health from the devastation of mountaintop removal,” said Scott Parkin of Rainforest Action Network, who participated in the sit-in. “At issue here is not whether mountaintop removal mining is bad for the environment or human health, because we know it is and the EPA has said it is. At issue is whether President Obama’s EPA will do something about it. So far, it seems it is easier to poison Appalachia’s drinking water than to defy King Coal.”

With the nation’s eyes on the BP disaster, the EPA, without publicly announcing the action, recently gave the green light for a major new mountaintop removal coal mining permit in Logan County, West Virginia. The permit would allow the destruction of nearly three miles of currently clean streams and 760 acres of forest, in a county where at least 13 percent of the land has already been permitted for surface coal mining. This is the first permit decision the EPA has issued under the new MTR guidelines, which came out last April and were anticipated to provide tougher oversight of the practice.

“This is a devastating first decision under guidelines that had offered so much hope for Appalachian residents who thought the EPA was standing up for their health and water quality in the face of a horrific mining practice,” said Amanda Starbuck of the Rainforest Action Network. “The grand words being spoken by Administrator Jackson in Washington are simply not being reflected in the EPA’s actions on-the-ground. Moving forward, it is clear that the EPA cannot end mountaintop removal coal mining pollution, as it has committed to, without abolishing mountaintop removal all together.”

For decades, Appalachian residents have been decrying the impact of mountaintop removal coal mining—the practice of blowing up whole mountains (and dumping the toxic debris into nearby streams and valleys) to reach seams of coal. Environmentalists, leading scientists, congressional representatives and even late coal state Senator Byrd have all called for the end to this mining practice.

A paper released in January 2009 by a dozen leading scientists in the journal Scienceconcluded that mountaintop coal mining is so destructive that the government should stop giving out new permits all together. “The science is so overwhelming that the only conclusion that one can reach is that mountaintop mining needs to be stopped,” said Margaret Palmer, a professor at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Sciences and the study’s lead author.

Since 1992, nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian streams have been filled at a rate of 120 miles per year by surface mining practices. A recent EPA study found elevated levels of highly toxic selenium in streams downstream from valley fills. These impairments are linked to contamination of surface water supplies and resulting health concerns, as well as widespread impacts to stream life in downstream rivers and streams. Further, the estimated scale of deforestation from existing Appalachian surface mining operations is equivalent in size to the state of Delaware.

The Pine Creek permit is currently awaiting approval from the Army Corps of Engineers.

Here are some photos from today's action.

Here is the sound track played on loop from within the building.

An open letter to all opponents of coal

By Colin Bennett

Coal is dirty. Everyone knows that. Saying otherwise is like saying that the Earth is flat; it’s just not true. The negative connotation that comes when people think about coal is practically part of our national psyche. Consider that the majority of children raised in the United States during the last century grew up being told that if they were bad, they would get a lump of coal for Christmas. Or, consider the images of a boy from 19th-Century America like Dick Van Dyke’s chimney sweep character in Mary Poppins, covered in soot, holding his broom. Even more people can probably picture a miner, face darkened with coal dust, sick, even dying, from black lung.

The point is that people already know that coal is dirty; thus, in the fight against mountaintop removal and the expansion of coal-fired power plants, we already have the advantage. But the coal industry and its supporters are feeling the heat; just a few short years ago, very few people were talking about coal. I certainly don’t remember seeing any advertisements about coal at all. Now, in face of looming climate legislation, they are spending vast sums of money spreading the lie of so-called "clean" coal. Unfortunately, though the deck is stacked against them, they are gaining ground. 

Take the 2008 presidential campaign, for instance:  both Senator John McCain and then Senator Barack Obama espoused "clean coal," while they crisscrossed the country. The reason for their language is obvious (albeit inconsequential). What is important is the fact that they got away with it. The coal industry, in a few short years, has successfully bamboozled much of the U.S. public into believing that "clean" coal is possible. President Obama even talked about “clean coal” his State of the Union address. Unfortunately, so many current anti-coal campaigns are perpetuating the problem; they are using the language of the coal lobby thereby legitimizing that position. The Coen Brothers television spot (put out by thisisreality.org) is cute but it ultimately just legitimizes the coal lobby’s claim. Quite frankly, I am disappointed. We are letting the coal industry frame the debate, thereby losing the high ground. 

We can still regain the upper hand and win the fight against coal. In order to do that we need to stop using the term, "clean coal," even when it is immediately followed or preceded by "there’s no such thing as." Simply saying, "clean coal," puts a wedge into people’s minds that clean coal could be a reality. 

Let me give you an example: Santa Claus. As soon as you hear, or in this case, read, the words "Santa Claus," an image of a jolly old man with a white beard and a red suit pops into your head. The same is true when you hear about the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy, or unicorns. Everyone knows that these things do not actually exist, yet, most people could describe, probably in vivid detail, what each of these mythical beings look like, all the while knowing they don’t exist. Of course, each of these examples are present, be it in children’s books, Hollywood movies, or embodied by a person in a red suit ringing a bell on a street corner in December. Even though "clean" coal fortunately doesn’t have quite the same status as Santa Claus, the coal industry’s goal is clearly to get the idea that coal can be clean into the minds of as many people as possible. 

Many people have undoubtedly seen the picture of the shiny black piece of coal with a power cord sticking out of it, accompanied by the caption "Clean coal means celebrating our energy independence 365 days a year." There’s nothing apparently dirty about that shiny black piece of coal. In fact, one could argue that the shiny black piece of coal looks downright clean. This is their attempt to create an image of ‘clean coal’ that people can reference in their minds when they hear the term "clean" coal; like Santa Claus and unicorns, although fantastical, ‘clean coal’ will exist if repeated enough. 

So here is my suggestion: stop validating the term "clean coal" with its use. Completely eliminate the term from everything you do. Coal is dirty. Period. Perpetuate that reality, not the myth of so-called "clean" coal. Reinforce the images that people already have of coal. We should spend our money and time showing people the images that will remind them about how dirty coal really is. Although I’m not in the advertising industry, I have a suggestion for a television commercial. It’s just a rough description but you should get the picture.

Start with historical shots that exemplify the fact that coal is dirty: begin with the miner and the boy covered in soot, show chimneys billowing black smoke circa 19th century Pittsburgh, and men shoveling coal into furnaces. The narrator (I’m thinking Dick Van Dyke) says "Coal is dirty. Since the time that humans first started burning coal, first for heat, then for transportation, and now for electricity, we have been polluting our atmosphere at an astronomical rate." With each example, a corresponding image should be presented, such as:  a coal stove, a steam engine, a coal-fired power plant, a city shrouded in smog. The narrator continues, "Now, with mountaintop removal, coal companies are destroying entire communities and ecosystems, making coal dirtier than ever, yet the coal companies are spending millions upon millions of dollars trying to trick you into thinking otherwise. Don’t believe the hype. Coal is dirty. Period." 

It might not be perfect but I definitely think it gets the point across: Coal is dirty. Repeat that message and repeat it often. The cards are stacked in our favor; if we play our hand correctly we can win this battle.

 















Mountaintop removal coal mining in southwest Virginia.

Mason Farmers Market: “Where Innovation Meets Tradition”

By Nya Jackson

Mason’s prospective students webpage proudly boasts that George Mason University is an institution “Where Innovation Meets Tradition”. As a student at Mason for three years I have found this statement to be true, which is why it’s saddening that the Mason’s Farmers Market has not returned and might not be returning next year either. Last fall, Smart Markets Inc., the premiere farmers' market in Northern Virginia, contracted with Mason to create the Mason Farmers' Market. It quickly became a popular alternative to Mason Dining as one of the few options available for students to purchase fresh fruits, vegetables and other foods.

Mark Kraner, Assistant Vice President of University Life, has been working to ensure that the farmers' market returns to campus in the fall. Mr. Kraner says the reason Smart Markets did not return to campus this semester was due to “a few of the vendors that conflicted with the contract with Smart Markets”.

While it is important that all contracts are honored, the solution to the breach of contract is not to kick Smart Markets off campus but to create a better contract that allows the Mason Farmers' Market to become a welcomed tradition at Mason. According to Jean Janssen, founder of Smart Markets, “prepared food vendors are the attraction at campus markets because students want food that is already prepared, especially when many students don’t have kitchens in their dorms to prepare fresh, uncooked produce.”

The previous contract between Smart Markets and Mason last fall didn’t allow for vendors to cook food on site or serve foods that were offered for immediate consumption and current talks about not having prepared food vendors will result in a market that isn’t attractive to students or potential vendors. "Mason left a lot of vendors stranded without income when they kicked us off campus after the fall semester and many of them are not willing to come back unless we are confident we will be here year-round” says Ms. Janssen who is concerned about ensuring all of her vendors have a stable market to sell their produce.

According to Derek Luhowiak, part owner of LocalSixFortySeven, a street cart owned by him and his wife, who source all the ingredients locally and cook everything to order, the university receives approximately 15% of sales from Sodexo and “of course we could not compete with Sodexo”. Derek went on to say “I was under the impression that universities were a place of higher learning and free thinking, a place where ideas were created. Not anymore; it’s all business and money.”

Upset vendors aren’t the only frustrated group Mason has to deal with, students are upset as well. “If the market doesn't come back I will lose faith in the university's sense of responsibility towards its students" says Kyleigh Purks, creator of the 'Rescue the Mason Farmers' Market’ Facebook group.

The question becomes: What is a market worth? According to Janssen and her vendors the combined revenue from the three prepared food vendors in the market was in the neighborhood of $5200. That means that the most Mason lost to the market in the two months the market was on campus was 15% of $5200 or about $750 and that assumes that all of that $5200 would have otherwise been spent on university food services. It seems safe to say that $750 isn’t a tremendous loss, certainly not when you consider all of the tangible and intangible benefits of the market.

The market allows us to support our local economy. Normally only about 17 cents of every dollar that we spend at the grocery store goes to a farmer but with the farmers' market all of the money goes to the farmer. The Mason Farmers' Market allowed students, faculty, and staff to reduce their ecological footprint since locally-grown produce does not travel as far as food sold in grocery stores and served by Sodexo. The difference in mileage saves fossil fuels and puts Mason on the right track toward achieving climate neutrality, to which President Merten has committed the university by signing the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment.

While University Life wants the Masons Farmers' Market to return to campus next September and remain through the entire school year, it can’t happen with the contract they had with Smart Markets last fall. According to Ms. Janssen, “we need to have more control over who is in the market to make up for the losses we suffer in the winter months when the produce is no longer coming to market”.

If we stop thinking about how much money the University could be “losing” each week to the vendors we might begin to realize that the market does bring something to campus rather than take anything away. When will we see the value of the market and make the Mason Farmers Market another example of “Where Innovation Meets Tradition” to boast to prospective and current students alike?