Search Maine Yellow Pages 
Log In | Register | Help
Environmental groups tout agenda for session
By SUSAN M. COVER
Staff Writer
Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel Wednesday, January 17, 2007

AUGUSTA -- Amy Graham of Farmington lobbied the Legislature three years ago to get rid of potentially harmful flame retardants used in common household items.

She's back again this year to finish the job.

Graham, the mother of two young children, said Tuesday that she wants the Legislature to prevent new uses of a flame retardant called Deca. It's used in mattresses, televisions, curtains and upholstered furniture to reduce the spread of flames in a fire.

In 2004, the Legislature voted to phase out two other forms of the chemicals, called Penta and Octa. Now, Graham and nearly two dozen environmental groups across the state are working to get rid of Deca.

"We buy covers for the electrical outlets, we put household cleaners and medicines up high out of the reach of curious youngsters," she said. "Yet, no matter how hard we try, there are chemicals in our homes from which we cannot protect our children."

The chemical, which was classified as a "potential human health risk" by scientists at the University of Southern Maine, has been found in human blood and breast milk, she said.

Graham was one of many people who came to the Statehouse on Tuesday for a press conference to talk about six environmental goals for the new legislative session. In addition to the bill to prevent new uses of Deca, the 22 groups -- which include the Sierra Club, Northern Forest Alliance and Maine Rivers -- have joined together to support a variety of bills.

With a combined membership totaling about 100,000, the groups have agreed on these goals:

n No weakening of current environmental protections.

n Adoption of the endangered and threatened species list developed by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. That list has 14 species including the New England cottontail, redfin pickerel, short-eared owl and a bird called Barrow's goldeneye. The list hasn't been modified since 1997.

n Adoption of rules to reduce greenhouse gases, which would help address global warming.

n Funding for the Land for Maine's Future program. The program needs at least $25 million a year to operate, and the groups would support a multiyear bond, said Jenn Burns of Maine Audubon.

n Approval of a $25 million bond to support redevelopment of riverfront communities. Ted Allen of Brunswick, a volunteer who monitors piping plovers at Reid State Park, said without official state protection, some wildlife won't survive. Even with a program in place to protect them, piping plover chicks don't often make it to maturity.

"The only reason we still have these birds in Maine is that they are included on Maine's endangered and threatened species list," he said. "The state has made a commitment to protect them."

When it comes to global warming, Bill Houston of Kingfield urged lawmakers to support a bill that would allow Maine to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. It sets a limit on the amount of global warming pollution that can come from fossil fuel-burning power plants.

"Our economies are vitally linked to winter as we used to know it," Houston said. "We don't have to accept global warming as inevitable."

Houston is an instructor at Skowhegan Regional Vocational Center, where he teaches the outdoor recreational leadership program. He's also a registered Maine guide.

Fifth-grade students from Andover School near Bethel read a poem at the press conference about their love for White Cap Mountain. The students traveled to Augusta to support land conservation, which is supported by the Land for Maine's Future program.

All of the goals put forward by the groups will help preserve the quality of life in Maine, said Susan Farady, of The Ocean Conservancy in Portland. "Maine is facing unprecedented challenges to our way of life," she said.

Susan Cover -- 623-1056

scover@centralmaine.com


Reader comments

Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First

Bill Randall of Winthrop, ME
Jan 17, 2007 3:11 PM
Regarding global warming, I'll put my money on objective and best science any day over the people whose views are motivated by either religious beliefs, monetary greed (individual or corporate) or political power. These entities are not to be trusted. It is folly to think that global warming is NOT happening. I encourage all readers to think globally. Do any of you really think we can continue to populate our earth (now 7 billion), as we have been doing in recent years, without causing major environmental problems? Think, please.report abuse
Frank Heller of Brunswick, ME
Jan 17, 2007 2:16 PM
Jon C. Carbon dioxide is only 2-3% of the Greenhouse layer; while water vapour is over 90%

see my article on the role of AVIATION in global warming(http://www.timesrecord.com/website/archives.nsf/56606056e44e37508525696f00737257/8525696e00630dfe85256ab9005e6033?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,heller)
or go google "aircraft contrails" global warming & European Unionreport abuse
Frank Heller of Brunswick, ME
Jan 17, 2007 2:12 PM
there is a huge problem of measuring global warming; and doing historical comparisons.

Depending on where your monitoring stations are positioned around the globe and at what elevation, your results will vary considerably...and can be tinkered with to get whatever results people see with their models.

I prefer ICE CORE data, and the graph for the Volstok cores well illustrates that over the past 400,000 years we've had similar peaks in CO2 & temps....and sharp drops(explain that folks)

In NOAA speak it's:

Air trapped in bubbles in polar ice cores constitutes an archive for the reconstruction of the global carbon cycle and the relation between greenhouse gases and climate in the past. High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 +/- 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations. Despite strongly decreasing temperatures, high carbon dioxide concentrations can be sustained for thousands of years during glaciations; the size of this phase lag is probably connected to the duration of the preceding warm period, which controls the change in land ice coverage and the buildup of the terrestrial biosphere."

or another statement:

(Genthon et al., 1987; Fischer et al., 1999; Petit et al., 1999; Clark and Mix, 2000; Indermuhle et al., 2000; Monnin et al., 2001; Mudelsee, 2001; Caillon et al., 2003), there is plenty of reason to believe that CO2 plays but a minor role in enhancing temperature changes that are clearly induced by something else, which latter italicized point is an undisputed fact that is clearly born out by the new ice core data."http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V8/N48/EDIT.jsp


report abuse
Jon Calan of Enfield, CT
Jan 17, 2007 2:06 PM
Dear UJ
The chart at Wikimdia is quite accurate according to the last 600,000 years of ice core evidence. At no time during the last 599,850 years has there been over 6 billion humans burning fossil fuels (yes, even wood counts). Therefore, to say the majority of climate changes we are witnessing are probably due to human activities is actually accurate.
CO2 stays in the upper atmostphere for quite awhile. It is fair to say that much of the climate changes we are now seeing can be linked to coal burning in Poland in the 1960s as well as our continued use of 10,000 gallons of gas per hour here in the U.S.
There are changes coming for you and me; both in climate and economies. These changes will be here whether we like it or not. The question becomes what are you and I willing to do (or not do) in order to make things changes as small as possible and what kind of legacy do we wish to leave behind. Please join the world in making this a better place for those who come after us. It's time we start thinking of something larger than ourselves.report abuse

Show all 10 comments

You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.