Rip Tide on the Chesapeake Bay

Here in Calvert County, the inverted middle finger of Maryland, we have a Comprehensive Plan by which we pretend to shape our own destiny. The wife and I have been ongoing participants in a group called Calvert Eats Local that meets monthly at the county library to feast and keep up-to-date on agricultural topics. Calvert Eats Local is providing input, through the umbrella organization, Sustainable Calvert Network, to the County Planning Commission in order to update the Comprehensive Plan - something that has not been done since 2004.

The impetus for this update to the plan is a wide open gap in the middle of the county seat, Prince Frederick, which appeared when an old middle school and armory were demolished. The Comprehensive Plan has a chapter on Economy which may bear most immediately on the new purpose for this piece of real estate, though I would hope that the People chapter, under the topic of Community Interaction, would play a larger role. Either way, focusing at this stage on the development of this parcel would compromise the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan, as in the tail wagging the dog.

A lot has happened in the world since 2004. I wonder if our planning commissioners have a good perspective on the economic, financial, ecological, demographic, technological, and natural resource developments that are driving our world, nation, and communities into a new era. Keeping in mind the precept that plans are nothing, but planning is everything, we should be able to improve our future through this thought exercise, as long as we don't swim against the rip-tide or exhaust ourselves trying to swim out of it.

An aerial view of the rip currents shows a financial crash in the offing followed by many years of economic adaptation. After the crash, eddy currents of energy and other natural resource peaks will drown much of what we have come to expect from commerce. The dilemma of the drill-baby-drill (or frack harder and deeper, baby) solution is that this has gotten to the point where earth, sea, and sky are revolting against further violations of whatever remains of our planet's purity. In fact, just backing off isn't going to prevent earth, sea, and sky from taking out their grievances on future inhabitants. Our future economies will be shaped by climate adaptation and, if the Paris climate agreement and the Maryland Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act mean anything, genuine consideration.

I doubt if our county planners will take this view unless the tide of the public's perception is swept in this foreboding direction and we cry out. Otherwise, our planners (even against their own misgivings) will rationalize and temporize these matters and pretend we can sustain the unsustainable.

Our focus in the Calvert Eats Local group is on the economy, with the outdated plan putting forth a vision that,

We are building a strong local economy based on renewable resources, high technology, retirement, recreation, and tourism.

Last night, among many other changes proposed by our group, I suggested that the word "strong" here be replaced by "resilient." Strong materials can also be brittle. Resilient materials, though somewhat strong, can handle a beating without shattering. We should try to make Calvert County shatterproof.

If you want to help shape the new Comprehensive Plan, there is a public forum on Thursday, 21 April at the Prince Frederick Library at 1 pm that will include the County Planning office. I may have more to say about our economic future at this meeting.

Staying in the Red

The key difference in Maryland's new decision-making process for prioritizing transportation projects is that there is a population-weighted scoring system, so that a great majority of our transportation funds will, no doubt, be allocated to projects that serve higher population areas beginning in 2018. While it has been swell coasting along the ribbon of highway that takes us to the nearest major towns eight or more miles either direction, we may have to slow down soon to dodge the potholes.

Investing the bulk of transportation funds in population centers is a change that should have been made long ago, yet Maryland seems to be leading in this respect, compared to states such as Virginia and North Carolina, which have enacted similar goals and measures based decision-making processes. As James Howard Kunstler might put it, you might as well forget your dream of being able to drive to Wal-Mart forever.

It is still possible, though more blatant, for the Governor to make his or her own decisions about transportation projects that don't jive with the priorities coming out of the scoring system. According to the mayor of Baltimore, Governor Hogan has already taken $736 M from projects in the Baltimore area and given the funds to rural transportation projects. However, having an ordered list of projects will, in the future, make any cherry-picking a lot more obvious.

One project already near the construction phase is the purple line light-rail system that will take beltway dwellers from one township to another along a route that skirts the northern edges of Washington, DC. That's something to look forward to (six years from now). Baltimore won't be getting their version of the same thing, however. Buses are going to be the mainstay there. Bicycles are figuring more into the planning of both systems.

I'm all for helping out the frazzled city commuters. In fact, making my humble abode less accessible to them by virtue of degraded roads would make me feel even better down here in Calvert County (in the map above, we're the middle finger resting on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay). Keeping these urbanites satisfied where they are makes it less likely that they will attempt to strike out for the exurbs. I hope they are not forced by circumstances to migrate before the purple line and newer projects make their city lives a bit more bearable.

Get Ready for Life in the Slow Lane

Besides lower emissions from electricity generation, the Maryland Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan puts transportation improvements at the top of the list of measures that we expect to help us achieve the mandated reductions. The principal improvements in transportation are in fuel economy and in cleaner vehicles.

The relative amount of greenhouse gases emitted by road transportation in Maryland is 28%. Yet, the amount of reduction predicted for these sources by 2020 is just 15%. Not only is the goal not proportionate to the problem, but the expectation is a bit high. The fuel economy goals are based partly on CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) projections. While the CAFE of light vehicles improved by 7 mpg to ~ 35 mpg since the turn of the century, the federal standard for 2025 would require an additional 15 mpg improvement, i.e. twice the improvement in half the time. The law of diminishing returns might have a problem with that.

In spite of CAFE's rose-colored looking glass, Maryland's projections could well turn out accurate for other reasons. Politicians could finally sell gas tax increases to their constituents while the oil price is still low for the next year or so. When oil prices and gasoline climb back to the unaffordable level, driving will fall off. Vehicle miles traveled is somewhat inelastic vs. gasoline prices, but an increasingly impoverished public is left with little choice but to economize.

Now that my wife and I have economized to the hilt by running our 2000 Honda Odyssey well past its natural lifespan (transmission hasn't worked right for the past two years), we are down to one vehicle, which is fine. We will probably trade in our 2012 Chevy Sonic for a slightly larger used car and cargo trailer. One criteria is that fuel economy will be 32 mpg or better. That limits our choices pretty quickly.

Having an economical vehicle is good for now, but a day is coming when that will be an oxymoron. The commitment to keep global temperature rise to less than 2 C will necessitate that a lot more of us rely on other means to move about and carry stuff. Let's hope that other means will be an electric vehicle.

Remedial Reading for the Maryland Climate Change Commission

Before we can expect the Maryland Commission on Climate Change to take biochar seriously as a carbon sequestration tool, we have to educate them more on the mechanisms which make it such a favorable option. In the latest update to the Maryland Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, biochar is cited as a promising emerging technology, but carbon farming is given only 0.4% credit for reductions planned by 2020. The real potential of biochar alone is more like 12%.

The Emerging Technologies Appendix does not mention biochar, but the 2015 plan update has a paragraph in the Emerging Technologies chapter, saying

biochar is made "by heating vegetation slow without oxygen" 

(it's made by heating a carbonaceous biomass, e.g. wood, ag waste, manure, fast or slow with little or no oxygen, depending on the process). Inputs could be "lumber waste, dried corn stalks and other 168 Maryland Department of the Environment plan residues." 

"The resulting biochar... can be placed in the soil as fertilizer." 

(It is a soil amendment, which improves many soil properties, including preservation and reduction of added fertilizers.) 

"However there are some risks to keep in mind to ensure that it remains carbon negative and doesn’t harm the soil it is meant to be fertilizing." 

Rarely would biochar cause lasting harm to soil. The long term benefits would outweigh short-term yield reductions. 

"Biochar must be used in soils of similar pH or else it can have a negative effect on soil fertility." 

Biochar could change pH in the short-run, but these changes are predictable, depending on the biochar feedstock and production method, and it can be applied discriminately. 

"If the biochar is made from forest ecosystems, the result could be a net increase in greenhouse gases." 

That final jab is the bugaboo that many biochar skeptics raise, fearing deforestation as an industrial means of obtain biochar feedstock. Sustainable forestry should trump biochar production as a general principle in crafting environmental regulations, but the two are far from mutually exclusive. It's also a reason why economies of scale should not be allowed to run rampant in the biochar industry. 

Positive publicity about biochar is growing. An authoritative article in Nature last week pointed out that the theoretical potential for soil to sequester carbon is 80% of the rate at which it is currently being added to the atmosphere by humans. That sure makes the Maryland Climate Change Commission carbon farming target of 0.4% look weak. The French initiative, 4 pour 1000, adopted by several other countries at the Paris climate conference, to increase soil carbon 0.4% through carbon farming is another inducement to put biochar on the entrée menu.

Waiting on the Courts

Another non-violent form of revolution for the sake of our collective well-being is advocated by Roger Cox, author of Revolution Justified - why only the law can save us now. Through demonstrated success in The Netherlands and current legal battles in other countries, Cox believes lawyers can turn the attention of legislatures throughout the world toward enacting laws that will put us on a path to a less "climatic" future. Several state Attorneys General are already taking up this "call to arms".

Maryland, of all places, didn't need the prompting of courts to spur legislative action that puts it on par with The Netherland's decision and second only to California and New York of U.S. states working on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We have been a leader in greenhouse gas reduction since 2009 when the first Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act was passed and continue to set the pace with the latest revision which puts our state on track to meet the ambitious goals embraced by the Paris Climate talks.

This revolution will not be televised. It will be hard to notice, at first, since the plans that the government will devise aren't due until the end of 2018 and not placed into effect until a year later. If you think transition of power plants away from coal to natural gas and an increase in telework and public transportation mark a revolution, then maybe you have noticed it. I will notice sometime in 2017 when public comments are solicited for the Department of the Environment's plan that includes provisions for sequestering carbon, because the law says they must,

"Provide for the use of offset credits generated by alternative compliance mechanisms executed within the State, including carbon sequestration projects, to achieve compliance with greenhouse gas emissions reductions required"

That's where biochar may get a lot more legs here in Maryland.

Exposing the Exposers

We are at the point that concerned citizens must hold the cold feet of anyone whose responsibility it is to uphold environmental laws close to the fire. +Albert Bates says that this is a civic duty brought to the fore by the revolutionary mandates of the Paris Agreement, as the preeminent example. The fate of humankind hangs in the balance.

Though easily jaded, I am not ready to begin my civic action efforts with civil disobedience, though there may come a time when roaring becomes my M.O.  A lot of leftist literature seems to be written by fanatical, poor-men's Donald Trumps, to borrow from The Flaming Lips. Less hostile steps may win the day in some cases, though escalation may ultimately lead to destructive behavior.

A template for reasonable objections to offending parties dealing with watershed protection regulations is provided by Community & Environmental Defense Services, offering an actionable alternative to raising hell. I noticed one glaring case in my community where Dominion Corp's contractor, IHI/Kiewit, has piled up excavated soil from the Cove Point LNG plant expansion and does not seem to protect it well from erosion.

One side (not pictured) is mostly covered with new turf, but the remainder does not seem to get the attention it should. The simple principle that Exposed Soil = Pollution makes this small mountain of dirt a likely pollution problem. The silt fence cannot be expected to catch more than half of the soil that reaches it, with the rest eventually settling in streams and ponds in the Gray's Creek subwatershed, and, ultimately the Chesapeake Bay.

I may not be fanatical or even a radical, but after Dominion's callous treatment of concerned citizens during the hearings on the LNG plant construction, I'll be ready to take the gloves off this time.

A Way to Plant Free Trees

The erosion control project that I am advocating for my church is to block surface runoff from eroding the topsoil into our detention pond by building a hugelkultur mound on the upper rim of the excavated area. This mound would be planted with a cover crop for at least one season, but after that, it would get some perennials or even trees in places where they wouldn't interfere with future building plans.

I hope we can get started with our preparations soon because we might be able to get help from The Alliance for the Chesapeake's Trees for Sacred Places program, which offers not only free trees, but technical support, training, and religiously-oriented motivation. You just need to have room to plant 60 or more trees. This may be possible, but it would surely fill up our open ground (outside the future building footprint). Teaming with another church congregation to make a total of 60 tree plantings may have to be our approach.

Alliance for the Chesapeake has partnerships with an organization called Interfaith Partners for the Chesapeake, which includes the tree planting program and a new program called RiverWise which looks at stormwater management more broadly, similar to the Watershed Stewards program, and even provides substantial financial assistance to correct problems.

It makes sense to involve church congregations in these efforts. They already have many diligent members who want to be contributors to improving their local communities, but starting with their own properties is a necessary first step.