Letter:

Environmental agency stifles public expression

Bryan Buchanan, Las Vegas

Friday, Jan. 11, 2008 | 2 a.m.

It appears that the wolves are guarding the sheep.

The Nevada Environmental Protection Division’s mission statement says it exists “to preserve and enhance the environment of the state in order to protect public health, sustain healthy ecosystems, and contribute to a vibrant economy.”

Why then would Greg Remer, chief of the agency’s air pollution control bureau, and Dante Pistone, its public information officer, try to silence public outcry against the Ely Energy Center at the air permit hearing Wednesday?

In an Associated Press article, Mr. Remer was quoted as saying the hearing would not be “a town meeting on whether (Nevadans) oppose or support the construction of the plant” or “a forum to air concerns about greenhouse gas emissions and global warming,” a declaration he and Mr. Pistone again issued at the hearing.

Given the environmental agency’s self-stated mission to be a steward of Nevada’s ecosystems, economy and public health, it seems that all the concerns Mr. Remer and Mr. Pistone preemptively tried to strike from the record are perfectly well-directed to the agency and particularly germane to a hearing that concerns the issuance of the proposed coal plant’s air pollution control permit.

They are also overlooking the fact that several other states, most notably Kansas, have refused to issue permits to coal plants because of their negative public health consequences, assured contribution to global warming, and the economic risk associated with forthcoming CO2 emissions regulations at the federal level.

There is nothing that legally limits the scope of public comment at these hearings. And, as representatives of the agency charged with protecting Nevada’s environment, their remarks are deeply troubling.

The writer is a regional conservation organizer for the Sierra Club.