Government▼Watch
Both the House and Senate transportation bills under negotiation in the U.S. Congress would undermine environmental laws and programs, say state and local air-quality officials and environmentalists. The Bush Administration and the road-building industry, however, maintain that changes are necessary to cut back on the red tape that hinders road building. “It’s just taking too long to decide on projects—whether to build or not build—and at the 11th hour, you get lawsuits filed and people aren’t happy,” says Jay Hansen of the National Asphalt Pavement Association. Known as the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEA) of 2005, the legislation, if enacted, would reauthorize federal funding for highway and transit projects through 2009. The Senate bill, in particular, would substantially weaken the role of environmental agencies, local elected officials, and the public in the planning process, says Michael Replogle of Environmental Defense, a nonprofit organization. “It would give much greater weight to transportation agencies to define the ba-
PHOTODISC
U.S. highway bills favor new roads
Environmental restrictions on new road construction could be eased under bills being considered by Congress.
sic purpose and need for projects, which is key to determining whether and what alternatives might be considered in an environmental assessment,” he notes. Additionally, both bills would streamline the environmental review process required under the National Environmental Policy Act by cutting state and local resource agencies out of the process, shortening the time for legal challenges, and reducing the number of alternatives for consideration, Replogle says. Both bills would weaken the Clean Air Act’s conformity program, which requires road projects to contribute
to air-quality improvements, for example, by adding a car-pool lane or collecting high tolls in an attempt to reduce car traffic. The bills would allow road planners to consider the airquality impacts for 10 years instead of the current 20, says William Becker, executive director of the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials. A project’s greatest air-quality impacts typically aren’t seen until 10 years after a road is built. The two bills include funding for mass transit and the construction of bike and pedestrian projects, Replogle notes. And the Senate bill offers an amendment that would require the U.S. EPA to revise its fuel-economy tests to give a more accurate reflection of real-world driving conditions. Likewise, a brand-new storm-water mitigation program included in the Senate bill would provide about $770 million to reduce pollution from highway projects. This program is under fire from the road builders, who say it diverts funds from transit projects; it will be one of the most controversial provisions the House and Senate negotiators will face. Chances for passing a bill soon are slim, say those involved with the process. —KRIS CHRISTEN
California’s Schwarzenegger does heavy lifting on global warming California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) weighed in on the climate change debate June 1, issuing an executive order that commits his state to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 11% by 2010, 25% by 2020, and more than 80% by 2050. Experts say that the size of California’s economy—the sixth-largest in the world—and its legacy as a global leader on environmental policy make for a potent mix that could nudge the federal government to enact nationwide limits on CO2 . California’s target for 2010 will bring GHG emissions down to 2000 levels, which are 8% above 1990 levels, according to Jason Mark, California director of the Union of Concerned Scientists. The cuts by 2010, roughly 60 million tonnes of CO 2 equivalents, will exceed the reductions made by Britain and France, which have economies similar in size to California’s,
318A ■ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / AUGUST 1, 2005
he says. Although the 2010 target is less ambitious than the Kyoto Protocol goals of 7% below 1990 levels, the 2050 target of 80% below 1990 levels is consistent with what scientists say is needed to avert dangerous rates of global warming. The goals can be met in part by programs already in place in California, such as a voluntary program that encourages solar roofs for new homes, a mandate for utilities to derive 20% of their power from renewable sources by 2010, and a law requiring cars to emit less CO2 beginning with 2009 models, says John Myers, communications director for California’s Environmental Protection Agency. But additional measures requiring legislation will be necessary to meet all the goals, he admits. A task force will develop strategies to meet the targets and report to the legislature by January. —JANET PELLEY
© 2005 American Chemical Society
