“It really comes down to profits over people.”
To understand how two recent bills passed by the Albuquerque City Council will thwart efforts by South Valley neighborhoods to protect themselves and others from pollution, I sat down with the New Mexico Environmental Law Center’s Eric Jantz. We talked about how people often claim that environmental regulations harm economic development—though the history of environmental protections and economic growth in the United States doesn’t support that position.
I’ve known Jantz for a pretty long time. We first met when I was assistant editor at High Country News and he was working with the Navajo Nation to ban uranium mining from within the reservation. Back then, Jantz didn’t mince words, telling me: “I don’t think the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission] cares whether the Navajo Nation has said no to uranium mining or not. I’m not sure that the NRC takes its trust responsibility, as a federal agency, very seriously.”
Jantz is still working with communities who have to deal with polluting industries. And he still doesn’t beat around the bush.
As I’ve mentioned before, city lawmakers passed two bills from Council Dan Lewis; one abolished the Albuquerque-Bernalillo Air Quality Control Board, a joint board of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, and the other set a moratorium on new air quality regulations until next February.
“These bills are specifically targeting a particular rulemaking,” Jantz said. “My suspicion is, they’ve been told that the [proposed Health, Environment and Equity Impact rule] will completely shut down economic development in Bernalillo County, [and] that’s nonsense.”
He continued: “It really comes down to profits over people. Squeezing the last little bit of profit out of every operation, I think, for some people matters more than the common good of being able to protect people’s health.”
You can watch the full conversation on the PBS App or YouTube.
The last I heard—from New Mexico Department of Game and Fish last Friday—the female wolf who dispersed from her pack again is still in the Jemez. (And yes, I’m still cheering her on. And I’m also hoping she’s healthy and finding enough to eat…as a pack animal, she can’t take down an elk on her own, after all.) Last week, Susan Montoya Bryan at the Associated Press reported that there aren’t immediate plans to capture her.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has finalized the rule establishing what’s called a “nonessential experimental population” of the gray wolf in Colorado. The new rule will become effective on December 8. According to Dennis Webb’s story in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel:
“The wolf is federally listed as endangered in Colorado. The rule will loosen the federal protections provided to the species in the state, including by allowing killing of wolves in situations such as protection of livestock from wolf attacks.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife is working to begin introducing wolves to the state by Dec. 31 based on language approved by state voters in 2020 in passing a ballot measure requiring wolf reintroduction. The Parks and Wildlife Commission has approved a reintroduction plan including provisions for allowing killing of wolves in some circumstances, such as to defend livestock, if the federal government allows it, and the state agency was hopeful of seeing the federal rule adopted before the end of the year.
The state Legislature had passed a bill that would have prohibited Parks and Wildlife from releasing wolves into the state until the federal rule was in place, even if that meant delaying reintroduction beyond Dec. 31, but Gov. Jared Polis vetoed the measure, saying it was unnecessary and undermined voters’ intent.”
More to check out this week:
• “Billions in Federal Assistance after New Mexico’s Largest Wildfire. But Little Money to Repair Streams” (Brett Walton, Circle of Blue)
• “New institute will provide resources to tribal nations on water rights” (Jeanette DeDios, KUNM)
• “State to adopt clean car rule” (Scott Wyland, Santa Fe New Mexican)
• “The Future of the Colorado River Hinges on One Young Negotiator” (Mark Olalde and Janet Wilson, ProPublica and The Desert Sun)
• “The 20 Farming Families Who Use More Water From the Colorado River Than Some Western States” (Nat Lash and Janet Wilson, ProPublica and The Desert Sun, with photos and videos by Jay Calderon of The Desert Sun)
• Last week, the first episode of Sovereign Innovations launched on PBS Digital Media. I can’t wait to watch all the episodes—and not only because NMPBS’s Benjamin Yazza is the director and project manager of the series. You can watch the trailer, the first episode, and the coming episodes on YouTube.
As most of you know already, the federal government released the Fifth National Climate Assessment last week. You can read through it yourself or find useful coverage in places like Inside Climate News and The Washington Post.
I haven’t read the entire report, but I did read the Southwest chapter. And I’d like to share a few important points with all of you. Four of the chapter’s key messages are particularly relevant to New Mexicans, including:
• Drought and Increasing Aridity Threaten Water Resources,
• Increasing Challenges Confront Food and Fiber Production in the Southwest,
• Climate Change Compromises Human Health and Reshapes Demographics, and
• Changes in Wildfire Patterns Pose Challenges for Southwest Residents and Ecosystems
Within the assessment, authors describe the evidence for changes and challenges, explain any uncertainties or research gaps, and describe what they mean by “confidence” and “likelihood.” Each section also includes adaptation solutions. And, for the first time, the national assessment also includes art. To check out the Art x Climate Gallery, which includes art from across the United States, head on over to the website.
Even a quick read through sections of the report illustrates how interconnected all the challenges are—and emphasizes that climate change is an issue each of us needs to consider, whether you’re interested in the environment, public health, or the economy.
Unfortunately, as the United Nations reported Monday, countries (including, of course, the United States) are lagging in necessary emissions cuts.
If you remember, under the 2015 Paris Agreement, countries agreed to cuts that would limit planet-wide warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
“The report finds that there has been progress since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015. Greenhouse gas emissions in 2030, based on policies in place, were projected to increase by 16 per cent at the time of the agreement’s adoption. Today, the projected increase is 3 per cent. However, predicted 2030 greenhouse gas emissions still must fall by 28 per cent for the Paris Agreement 2°C pathway and 42 per cent for the 1.5°C pathway.
As things stand, fully implementing unconditional Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) made under the Paris Agreement would put the world on track for limiting temperature rise to 2.9°C above pre-industrial levels this century. Fully implementing conditional NDCs would lower this to 2.5°C.”
As Gloria Dickie reported for Reuters:
“At 3C of warming, scientists predict the world could pass several catastrophic points of no return, from the runaway melting of ice sheets to the Amazon rainforest drying out.
‘Present trends are racing our planet down a dead-end 3C temperature rise,’ said U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. ‘The emissions gap is more like an emissions canyon.’”
And so, I’m reminded of what Eric Jantz said of our local air pollution problems, because it applies more broadly to what’s happening with the emissions gap, as well: “It really comes down to profits over people. Squeezing the last little bit of profit out of every operation, I think, for some people matters more than the common good of being able to protect people’s health.”
P.S. If a friend forwarded you this message, sign up here to receive the newsletter yourself. You can also read recent newsletters online. And if you miss us throughout the week, follow Our Land on Instagram.
