North Carolina: An Environmental Overview Leadership North Carolina - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

north carolina an environmental overview
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

North Carolina: An Environmental Overview Leadership North Carolina - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

North Carolina: An Environmental Overview Leadership North Carolina Class XXVI Environment Session, 03 April 2019 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/USA_North_Carolina_relief_map_cut.jpg Dr. Amy Knisley Environmental Studies


slide-1
SLIDE 1

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/USA_North_Carolina_relief_map_cut.jpg

  • Dr. Amy Knisley

Environmental Studies Warren Wilson College

Leadership North Carolina Class XXVI Environment Session, 03 April 2019

North Carolina: An Environmental Overview

slide-2
SLIDE 2

...starting with NC in context...

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity ENERGY CLIMATE CHANGE

slide-3
SLIDE 3

~500 miles E to W 53,821 miles2 90.5% land, 9.5% water 28th in land area

  • Mt. Mitchell 6,684’

River Miles:  RI 1400  SC 29,900  NC 37,800  AK 365,000  VA 49,300 Persons/square mile in 2015: 1-NJ (1218) 14-VA (212) 15-NC (207) 50-AK (1.3) 19-SC (163) 0’ 

 301 miles of coastline (=VA + SC)  7th of 23 coastal states (TX=6th, OR=8th)  6% of U.S. shoreline (excl. AK)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/USA_North_Carolina_relief_map_cut.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_coastline

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Albermarle Snd Pamlico Snd

Chowan Tar-Pamlico Roanoke Neuse Cape Fear Pee Dee Catawba Broad French Broad Pigeon

Tuckaseegee Little Tenn. Nantahala

Yadkin Dan

River Miles:  RI 1400  SC 29,900  NC 37,800  AK 365,000  VA 49,300

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/USA_North_Carolina_relief_map_cut.jpg

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Population Growth 1940-2018

VA 20% SC 27%

NC 29%

U.S. 16%

2000-2018

U.S. Census Bureau

slide-6
SLIDE 6

State GDP 2000-2017, billions of chained 2012 dollars

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2018

ND=$49b (47th) NC=$484b (11th) VA=$464b (13th) SC=$199b (26th)

ND 107% VA 34% U.S. 37% NC 36% SC 32% MI 5% GDP 2017 vs 2000

slide-7
SLIDE 7

U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2018

Per Capita Real Personal Income, by State, 2008-2016, chained 2012 dollars

ND=$55,360 (4th) NC=$45,216 (34th) VA=$50,180 (18th) SC=$42,958 (44th)

ND 13% VA 7% U.S. 10% NC 4% SC 12% MI 16% RPI 2016 vs 2008

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Question: Is economic growth good for the environment?

slide-9
SLIDE 9

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity CLIMATE+ ENERGY

slide-10
SLIDE 10

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p58

Fair land conservation Rising recycling rates Conservation funding Hazardous waste sites MSW capacity

slide-11
SLIDE 11

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2018. Summary Report: 2015 National Resources Inventory.

Excludes Alaska

Developed land 1982-2015 VA +75% U.S. +60% NC +106% SC +98%

Land Use

slide-12
SLIDE 12

National Wetlands Inventory, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2017)

FL 28% NC 16% SC 20% VA 6% WI 14% AK 42% Wetlands Loss in Coterminous U.S.

US Fish and Wildlife Service

 NC has lost about 50% of its wetlands, on par with nation.  ~95% of the remaining 5.5m acres are in the coastal plain.  Coastal loss slowed dramatically since 1985 “Swampbuster.”

Brad Rich, “A Disturbing Report about Wetlands” (Dec 2013)

Wetlands, est. 2007

slide-13
SLIDE 13

USFS Forest Inventory and Analysis (2012), https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/

AK 35.2% NV 3.2% VA 62.9% NC 59.7% SC 68.2% MI 55.6% WA 52.7%

On average, 21.5% of forest land has been lost in the U.S. since 1630. DE, IN and OH are estimated to have lost 60% or more; other states, such as ID and CO, have lost 5% or less. But in the 20th century, steady state or reforestation have been the trend. 34 of 50 states have seen gains averaging 8% between 1920 and 2012. Net forested land, 1920 to 2012: MD = 0% VA = 6.6% US = 4% NC = 2.2% VT = 26% SC = 14.7%

Forest, 2012

slide-14
SLIDE 14

“Baseline Estimates of Carbon Stocks in Forests and Harvested Wood Products for National Forest System Units; Southern Region.” USDA Forest Service (2015) http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/documents/SouthernRegionCarbonAssessmentTwoBaselines.pd

One Tg (teragram) = 1 trillion grams! 1 paperclip = 1 gram! Great Pyramid of Giza = 6 Tg.

Carbon Sequestered in southern forests, 2015

AL, KY, GA, TN, FL, LA, MS, VA, AR, OK, NC, SC, TX, P.R. 4 Natl For units, 2 special units

slide-15
SLIDE 15

USGS Protected Areas Data Portal (2017): https://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/data/statistics/ USGS Protected Areas Database/Viewer: https://maps.usgs.gov/padus/

AK 55% (35%) NV 80% (15%) VA 10% (4%) NC 9% (4%) SC 8% (4%) MN 23% (7%) ME 11% (5%)

“...15-30% of the land in any state or ecoregion will need to be [protected] in order for our native biodiversity to be effectively conserved.” Conservation in America: A Status Report. Defenders of Wildlife (2002)

TX 3% (2%)

Protected Land, 2017

slide-16
SLIDE 16

What is “development”?

Alteration of natural land- and water-forms to enable ongoing human habitation and use. Economic productivity and gain is usually an important consideration in land development.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

U.S. Census Bureau Building Permits Survey (2016)

N.C. Building Permits issued 1960- 2018, in thousands

What is “development”?

Hog and Pig Sales as % of Agricultural Sales, by County, 2012

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Pork Checkoff. State Rankings by Hog and Pig Inventory. https://www.pork.org/facts/stats/structure-and-productivity/state-rankings-by-hogs- and-pigs-inventory/

In 2018, North Carolina was home to 8.9 million hogs, second only to Iowa with 22.6 million. In 2018 NC was home to 0.8 hog per person; IA housed 7.2 hogs per person.

slide-19
SLIDE 19

2018 NC land conservation trust fund awards: Clean Water Management ($24.6m; $65m req. FY19) Parks and Recreation ($28.3m (FY17)) Agricultural Dev. & Farmland Preservation ($4.6m) NC Natl Wild and Scenic Rivers: New, Chattooga, Lumber, and Horsepasture Over 100 eligible rivers.

NC DEQ, North Carolina Conservation Planning tool (2013)

In FY 2008 the trust funds had $289 million available. Funding levels crashed until FY 2013, which saw modest increases. Total FY 2018 funding for the the three trust funds was about $42.5 million, and FY 2019 funding is $32.5m. Conservation Trust for NC, 2018.

What is “land conservation”?

slide-20
SLIDE 20

In the U.S., both the total amount

  • f Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)

produced, and per person rates, have increased over time. Since the mid-1980s, recycling rates have increased considerably.

Solid Waste

EPA National Overview: Fact and Figures

  • n Materials, Wastes, Recycling (2015)
slide-21
SLIDE 21

1990 2005 2010 2015 MSW/Person/Day: U.S. 4.6 4.7 4.4 4.5 MSW/Person/Day: N.C. 5.6 7.2 5.1 6.1 Recycling Rate: U.S. 16% 31% 34% 35% Recycling Rate: N.C. 6% 11% 14% 15%

  • EPA. Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: Facts and Figures (2015)

NC DEQ, Div of Waste Management. Legislative Reports (2017)

NC Solid Waste, 2016-17

  • 11,385,939 tons of waste, total
  • 1,678,882 tons of CCR’s from 6 electrical plants
  • 48 municipal waste landfills
  • 51 construction and demolition landfills
  • 15 industrial landfills
  • 42 years of landfill capacity remaining
  • 47 composting operations
  • 16 mulching operations
  • 7 commercial medical waste operators
  • 0 waste-to-energy incinerators

Solid Waste

slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • EPA. Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: Facts and Figures (2015)

NC DEQ, Div of Waste Management. Legislative Reports (2017)

How many Waste To Energy incinerators are there in N.C.?

71 WTE plants 0.5% of U.S. electricity reduce waste volume by ~85%

Check out this 2017 story about Florida’s newest WTE plant.

slide-23
SLIDE 23

NC DEQ. Div of Waste Management Legislative Report (2017).

Question: Would you like to see a Waste- To-Energy plant in N.C.?

slide-24
SLIDE 24

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p58

Fair land conservation Rising recycling rates Conservation funding Growing waste stream

  • Support conservation funding
  • Support local land conservation

projects.

  • Support local composting.
slide-25
SLIDE 25

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity CLIMATE+ ENERGY

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Question: What are the main causes of air pollution?

slide-27
SLIDE 27

NC Dept of Envt and Nat Resources, North Carolina State of the Environment Report 2011, p23

Steady NAAQS improvement Localized noncompliance Hazardous air pollutants

slide-28
SLIDE 28

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Six “Criteria Pollutants” Hazardous Air Pollutants

187 Federally-listed: Metals, such as cadmium, mercury, chromium, and lead compounds. Solvents, such as trichloroethylene, hexane, and methylene chloride. Others, such as benzene, dioxin, asbestos, and toluene. NC has added 21, including acetic, nitric and sulfuric acids; ammonia; bromine.

Air quality is managed under the framework of the 1970 Clean Air Act

slide-29
SLIDE 29
slide-30
SLIDE 30

Ozone (03) (~30) Particulate Matter 2.5 (~25) Particulate Matter 10.0 (~12) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) (~12) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (~6) Carbon Monoxide (CO) (~4) Nitrogen Oxides (NOy) (~2)

Live track NC AQ monitors here:

https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality/air-quality-monitoring

Locations of NC Ambient Air Quality Monitors

slide-31
SLIDE 31
slide-32
SLIDE 32
slide-33
SLIDE 33

NC DENR State of the Environment Report 2011, p25 NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p28

Map 1: NC Current Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

slide-34
SLIDE 34

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p32

slide-35
SLIDE 35

National Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards: 187 regulated “Air Toxics”

2011 National Air Toxics Assessment – evaluates 138 air toxics for which EPA has health benchmarks; estimates “excess” cancer and non-cancer health risks attributable to them. In each census tract, maximum exposure is assumed over a 70 year lifetime.

Elevated risk of cancer, persons per million (2011)

U.S. 39.9 NC 41.0 VA 41.6 SC 43.8 D.C. 59.7 WY 19.8

LA is home to 8 of the 10 riskiest census tracts in the country, ranging from 4 to 20 times the average national risk. 58% of NC census tracts have risk above the national average; compared to 49% of VA tracts, and 74% of SC tracts. 97% of Mecklenburg County is above the national average; 6% is at 1.5 times the national average, or higher.

slide-36
SLIDE 36

NC Dept of Envt and Nat Resources, North Carolina State of the Environment Report 2011, p23

Steady NAAQS improvement Localized noncompliance Hazardous air pollutants

It really is OK to insist

  • n clean air.
slide-37
SLIDE 37

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity CLIMATE+ ENERGY

slide-38
SLIDE 38

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p33

WATER Water Quality

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p42

2007 estimates, gallons: 273,366,016-Groundwater 15,128,634,713-Surface water

slide-39
SLIDE 39

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p35

Water quality is managed under the framework of the 1972 Clean Water Act

Duke Power Asheville Plant NPDES permit (2006) re “Outfall 001” (Ash Pond Treatment System)

2679 CAFO permits

~500 farm owners ~4400 lagoons ~16.7 million swine

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits. Ambient water quality standards, based on use classification.

slide-40
SLIDE 40

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, pp36-37

1970s 1980s

slide-41
SLIDE 41

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p38

39% of the state’s surface waters are considered “impaired.”

slide-42
SLIDE 42

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p41

Groundwater is in much better shape.

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Southern Environmental Law Center (2016)

A couple of key issues...coal ash...

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Waterkeeper Alliance summary of NC swine (and other) CAFO concerns. In a letter dated 1/12/2017, from the U.S. EPA’s External Civil Rights division to the N.C. DEQ, EPA expressed “deep concern” that DEQ’s use of a “general permit” for more than 2,200 industrial hog operations has a disparate, discriminatory impact on African American, Latino, and Native American communities in eastern North Carolina.

...and remember the hog farms...?

slide-45
SLIDE 45

NC Dept of Envt and Nat Resources, North Carolina State of the Environment Report 2011, p49

Threats to Coastal Habitat

White=no impact/unknown Yellow=minor impact Orange=moderate impact Red=major impact

Upland development. Nutrients and eutrophication. Nonpoint sources. Toxic chemicals.

slide-46
SLIDE 46

NC DENR Div of Marine Fisheries coastal water quality sampling, interactive map: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/testing-sites NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p52

slide-47
SLIDE 47

NC DENR, State of the Environment Report 2011, p33

We have enough water, and it is mostly clean. A lot of it is dirty, and we must plan for shortages. It’s OK to ask farming and utilities to be accountable.

slide-48
SLIDE 48

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity CLIMATE+ ENERGY

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Question: What can you do about climate change?

slide-50
SLIDE 50

U.S. Energy Consumption, Quadrillion Btus, 1949-2015

by SOURCE TOTAL

slide-51
SLIDE 51

N.C. Energy Consumption, Trillion Btus, 1960-2014

by SOURCE TOTAL

slide-52
SLIDE 52

U.S. Energy Consumption PER CAPITA, Million Btus, 1949-2015

by SOURCE TOTAL

From 1980 to 2015, per capita energy consumption averaged 330 million Btus/year. During those 35 years, only 7 varied more than 5% from the 330 million Btu mark. Five of the 7 were 2011-2015, ranging 6% to 9% below average.

slide-53
SLIDE 53

2016 Energy Use mBtu/Capita

U.S. EIA (2018)

WY 860 (2) RI176 (51) SC 333 (18) NC 251 (37) VA 277 (31) CA 199 (48)

2014 Energy-Related CO2 emission metric tons/Capita

WY 112.3 (1) NY 8.6 (50) SC 15.5 (28) NC 12.8 (34) VA 12.5 (38) CA 9.2 (49)

slide-54
SLIDE 54

U.S. RENEWABLE Energy Consumption PER CAPITA, Million Btus, 1960-2015

by SOURCE TOTAL

Renewables as % of Total, 1970-2015

VA 6.7% (33d) NC 7.9% (28th) SC 9.0% (25th)

ME 38.3% (3d)

US EIA, State Reports (2015)

CA 11.5% (16th) LA 3.7% (46th)

Renewables, % of State Energy Use, 2015

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Energy trends, especially in electricity, are favorable for renewables. But policy makes a big difference.

slide-56
SLIDE 56

American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. State Policy Scorecard program. State Government: Financial incentives e.g. tax credits for energy efficient homes/renovations; credits for renewable energy production; zoning incentivizing wind and solar; state fleet efficiency. Building: Building efficiency codes and compliance with them. Combined Heat and Power: Policies and financial incentives that encourage CHP at multiple scales. Utilities: Policies requiring utilities to make the energy mix green and efficient; financial incentives to support this; disclosure rules for utilities and public access to information; strong compliance. Transportation: Tailpipe emissions rules and compliance; mass transit funding and provision. Appliance Standards: Efficiency standards and compliance, from microwaves to furnaces.

2018 Scorecard, American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

slide-57
SLIDE 57

N.C. Coastal Resources Commission Science Panel on Coastal Hazards, North Carolina Sea Level Rise Assessment Report (2010), p11 (under auspice of NCDENR Div of Coastal Management

“Given the range of possible rise scenarios and their associated levels

  • f plausibility, the Science Panel recommends that a rise of 1 meter

(39 inches) be adopted as the amount of anticipated rise by 2100, for policy development and planning purposes.” (11)

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, sea level rise along the coast between NC and MA is accelerating at three to four times the global rate.

slide-58
SLIDE 58
slide-59
SLIDE 59

Policy has successfully driven market forces in the direction of renewables. And it can do more!! Look into solarizing your house! Buy a used electric vehicle!

slide-60
SLIDE 60

AIR Air Quality LAND Land Conservation Waste Disposal WATER Water Quality Water Quantity

Thanks! Questions?

CLIMATE+ ENERGY

  • Dr. Amy Knisley

Environmental Studies Warren Wilson College aknisley@warren-wilson.edu

slide-61
SLIDE 61
slide-62
SLIDE 62
slide-63
SLIDE 63

NC Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation Trust (2013)

slide-64
SLIDE 64

NC DEQ, Pre-Regulatory Landfills map (2016)

Total “Closed” “Open” Old landfills 677 8 669 Inactive hazardous 2435 556 1879 3112 564 2548 Plus 39 “Superfund” sites.

NC Hazardous Waste sites, as of 2016

NC DEQ , Inactive Hazardous Sites Report to the Legislature (2016).

OLD LANDFILL SITES  80% “high risk” (within 1000’ of water supply, home, school, church, day care)  $9.2m funding (from state-wide tax) during FY16.  Started assessment on 7 sites; continued assessment on 53; continued remediation on 29; and completed (drumroll) 3 sites.

slide-65
SLIDE 65

NC DEQ , Inactive Haz Waste Sites Map (2016)

Total “Closed” “Open” Old landfills 677 8 669 Inactive hazardous 2435 556 1879 3112 564 2548 Plus 39 “Superfund” sites.

NC Hazardous Waste sites, as of 2016

NC DEQ , Inactive Hazardous Sites Report to the Legislature (2016).

INACTIVE HAZARDOUS SITES  360 (~20%) of the open sites are “orphaned.” 314 of those are “high risk”  $400,000 annual appropriations for these sites; plus bankruptcy recoveries.  $670,500 estimated for each cleanup (so $241m needed).