|
|
||
|
|
The Dow/EPA Tentative Dioxin Pact, Through an Activist’s Eyes
(Note to Readers: The website cleanwatershedcampaign.org provides regular updates on mid-Michigan dioxin concerns.) By Mike Thompson During a quarter century as an environmental activist, Michelle Hurd-Riddick has learned that perceived progress often prove to be an illusion. This is why her optimism is guarded, despite a pair of apparent recent victories for mid-Michigan’s water, land and air. Dow Chemical Company has signed a long-awaited pact aimed at eventual dioxin cleanup, prodded by a newly aggressive federal Environmental Protection Agency under President Barack Obama and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. A public hearing is set for 7 p.m. on Thursday, November 5th, at Saginaw Valley State University’s Curtiss Hall. Meanwhile, the Michigan Public Service Commission has strongly questioned the need for Consumers Energy to build a new $2.3 billion coal-fired plant at the Karn-Weadock facility in Essexville. One question is whether there is public need for more electricity. Another is whether Karn-Weadock occupies a wetland. We are approaching what could be a watershed year for the ecology of the Saginaw Bay watershed. At the close of 2008, few would have predicted a tentative Dow-EPA pact, or that Consumers Energy’s Karn-Weadock plans would be in such serious trouble. “I don’t know if it’s a winning streak, but it’s an upward swing,” Michelle says. “This has always been a roller coaster ride, with highs and lows, victories and defeats. We always have to remain vigilant and hold their feet to the fire.”
‘Who is SHE to Make These Claims?’
What does Michelle really know? While the expert scientists at Dow Chemical and Consumers Energy are on the job (along with their professional spokespeople and powerful political allies), Michelle is laboring a minimum of 40 hours per week as a hospital nurse. She’s just an everyday citizen. What does Michelle really know? Michelle’s main answer, when asked her qualifications, is research, research, research. No, she isn’t a scientist. But she has access to the research of independent scientists who don’t follow the corporate line that dioxin is buried and harmless, or that clean coal technology would cleanse emissions. When she speaks, she believes in her heart that she knows of which she speaks.
Complex Environmental Questions As we explore these issues, it seems a good idea to focus upon the environmental activists – the spokes in the squeaky wheel of local politics that get the grease and command attention – as it were. Michelle Hurd-Riddick for sure is at the forefront, both for longevity and consistency. Topics such as tax rates, unemployment rates and student test scores all have their ins and outs. Still, reporting on those topics seems like basic math, compared to the environment, which is more akin to calculus. Environmental activists argue, for just one example, that the standard for dioxin cleanup should be the old state standard of 90 parts per trillion. Dow Chemical and its allies have successfully pitched a change to a looser federal standard of 1,000 parts per trillion. We’re talking parts per trillion, not million or billion, but trillion - so who can understand all of this? And if we join the public hearing at Saginaw Valley State on November 5th, how are we going to comprehend what’s happening as we listen to the environmental activists and the Dow Chemical officials again trade testimony? Michelle, of course, modestly insists that the dioxin crisis is far bigger than any one person. True enough. But to gain some insight from an activist’s perspective, to tell us in effect why we should attend that hearing at SVSU, let’s try to put ourselves in Michelle’s shoes for a moment.
From Recycler to ‘Troublemaker’ The former Michelle Hurd grew up on Saginaw’s East Side during the 1960s. She recalls childhood family visits to what seemed to be the clean and fresh waters of the Saginaw Bay, and upward to Lake Huron. Even with her 25 years experience, she still jokes that she is a “newbie” to the ecology movement, because she was nearly 30 years old when she started to get involved during the middle 1980s. Her first work was as a recycling advocate with SAVE, Saginaw Action Volunteers for the Environment. Gradually she got involved in the Lone Tree Council with “oldies” such as Terry Miller, veterans of the 1970s fight to block plans for the Midland Nuclear Plant. “Our greatest economic resource in this region is our river system,” Michelle says. “Imagine if we looked like Grand Traverse Bay, or the Crystal River or the Boardman River. The entire region could thrive on activities on the river. Why don’t more people see that?” Her concern for the environment reflects her compassion as a nurse. In both her volunteer role and in her professional job, she is serving to safeguard the public health. Still, anyone who has received her friendly and cheery nursing care might express surprise at the intensive demeanor she often displays in the public arena. “I dare anybody from the Chamber of Commerce, to the legislators, to the public health officials, to state that it’s OK for a child to grow up on contaminated property, or to eat contaminated food,” she asserts. Michelle gradually evolved from recycling, an activity that is positive but sort of non-political, similar to today’s feel-good “green” ecological culture. She participated and played leadership roles in campaigns to protect wetlands, and to prevent expansion of landfills and construction of waste incinerators. For these issues, unlike recycling, there were political battles against forces that Michelle increasingly came to view as the political status quo. No longer was Michelle a self-described “armchair environmentalist.” There were people, powerful and influential people, who would challenge what she said. She was called upon to respond with loads of reading and research, in order to serve as a credible advocate. She found herself writing position papers, making statements at public hearings, and offering responses when the news media inquired. She became not only a leader, but an organizer for action.
Dioxin: ‘Shameful, Ludicrous’ Claims Then came dioxin - a poison considered up to 100 times more powerful than even mercury or PCBs. In January 2002, a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employee became a whistleblower and secretly shared information with a high profile activist, David Dempsey, who at the time was policy advisor to the Michigan Environmental Council. Dempsey in turn shared the 5-inch-thick package of documents with Michelle and Terry Miller. The gist of the info was that in 2000 and 2001, DEQ soil testing along the Saginaw River in Saginaw had uncovered dioxin levels that were up to 80 times higher than state standards for residential cleanup. One specialist e-mailed another with an opinion that nearby residents should be evacuated, for safety’s sake. However, top DEQ administrators under Governor John Engler at the time declined to inform elected officials, much less the public. Michelle hails from Saginaw while Terry Miller resides in Bay City, so she took the lead role in making the dioxin information public. A DEQ spokesman derided her statements as “shameful and ludicrous.” Another stated, “It’s not out of the ordinary for them to make wild and outrageous claims.” A third asserted, “We won’t be goaded into doing something prematurely, just to appease a vocal minority.” Still, the proverbial cat was out of the bag.
Vindication for Environmental Activists Michelle wasn’t intimidated – far from it. Within two months, the DEQ was sending letters to nearly 3,000 households in the areas where testing had revealed the high dioxin levels, inviting the citizens to public forums. Even conservative Republicans, such as then-Senator Mike Goschka, were critical of the DEQ and the Engler Administration for covering up. Democrat Jennifer Granholm, campaigning to replace Engler, was among visiting politicians who expressed concerns. In 2003, Michelle was optimistic that the new Granholm Administration was clamping down. Then came challenges from Dow Chemical, in what Michelle describes as “corporate push back, political strong arming, and stall tactics.” The DEQ did not get support from Granholm to enforce the law and to compel Dow Chemical to address dioxin contamination. Hence, federal EPA intervention this summer. All the while, however, Michelle and other activists were vindicated from the “expert” criticism that they didn’t know their facts. Subsequent tests consistently have revealed ultra-high levels of dioxin, including a national record 1.6 million parts per trillion near the Wickes Park boat launch in Saginaw’s South End. Michelle was outraged with the closed-door meetings that took place in both the Engler and Granholm administrations with Dow. EPA's recent closed-door negotiations do not sit well with her either, even with the new EPA seeming to serve as an ally. “These rivers are public property,” she says, “and their well-being is dependent on sunshine and transparency.” While unhappy with the Granholm Administration, Michelle says she at least sees more openness when compared with the “stealth and clandestine” activities of the Engler years. Michelle says the Obama Administration has offered new hope, and she even joined a half-hour telephone confab in May with the EPA’s Lisa Jackson, who stridently has pledged that the EPA will finally get off the dime. Take Nothing for Granted But the lessons of six years ago linger, Michelle notes. “There’s a lot of work that still needs to be done and we don’t wear rose-colored glasses, because we heard good things from Jennifer Granholm in 2003 and her performance has been less than stellar on this issue,” she says. “Can the new EPA prevent politics from again being injected into the situation? Historically, nobody has been able to keep politics out of it.” She points to history. “In fact, dioxin goes back to 1978, when dioxin was first found in the fish. There was nothing done at the start with the Reagan Administration (and then George H.W. Bush) in charge of the EPA. The state DEQ started negotiating with Dow in 1996, and that also went nowhere,” Michelle explains. “The regulatory agencies have been dancing with Dow for three decades. Now it’s 2009, and in some ways we’re starting the process all over again.” Even if Lisa Jackson and the new federal EPA under Obama hold firm, the process of the ongoing dioxin investigation and the subsequent cleanup are scheduled to consume a decade, with 2018 as the new target date for completion. “With all of the delays, if Dow had just done everything that Dow said it would do in 2003, we would be halfway finished by now,” Michelle says. “Years ago, I was very impatient with all of this, but you have to learn to ride that roller coaster. You learn to pace yourself. I still foresee us being with this issue for many, many years to come, but the goal is getting to a clean watershed.”
|
|
|
|
||
|
home |
Out & About |
Dining |
Events |
singles |
classified |
archives |
advertising |
||
The
powers-that-be are none too happy with recent developments. They ask, in
effect: Who is Michelle Hurd-Riddick (among others) to argue that dioxin
is such a horrible health hazard and that an ultimate dioxin cleanup
should follow strict standards, when Dow Chemical insists there is no
evidence of human harm? Who is she to insist that “clean coal” from
Karn-Weadock wouldn’t really be clean, or that there’s no need for a new
plant in the first place because the public’s future energy demand will
decline, when Consumers Energy insists that demand will increase?