The Hudson Valley Regional Council is getting more than $3 million from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to install filters to reduce methane emissions from closed landfills and to install solar arrays and battery storage systems. It’s part of $4.3 billion in grants to fund projects in 30 states to reduce pollution.
EPA Region 2 Administrator Lisa Garcia spoke with WAMC about the efforts being funded.
Garcia: It's spanning across supporting community-driven solutions to address the climate crisis and help accelerate America's clean energy transition. And so here, the Hudson Valley Council, the selected application will support the installation of biofilters to reduce fugitive methane emissions from closed landfills across the mid-Hudson Valley region in New York. And it's really important to at least identify that these are closed landfills. Part of the project also will promote the installation of solar arrays and battery storage systems. Part of the grant is also the installation of native pollinator gardens and create long-term ecosystem stewardship plans at former landfills. So what we do know is that this will reduce emissions from 14 closed landfills in municipalities across the Hudson Valley. And the great thing about this is a lot of those landfills, unfortunately, are in low-income or disadvantaged communities, and so the benefits will also flow to communities that historically haven't received these benefits and certainly are demanding cleaner air and cleaner water. So it's a win-win. So there are 14 closed landfills. And again, this is to be able to reduce methane emissions, which we know is about a third of the greenhouse gas pollution. So it's great that we're going to deal with the methane. The landfills that have been identified, and of course, you know this will be in design and making sure that you know that it's feasible and all the work can get done. But it's the city of Beacon, Dutchess County landfill, town of Amenia, town of Bethel, town of Cornwall, town of Gardiner, town of Hurley, town of New Paltz, town of Northeast, town of Phillips town, Rhinebeck, Wallkill, Woodstock, and the village of Mamaroneck. And so those are the 14 landfills that are projected to be a part of this project and part of this effort by the Hudson Valley Council.
Levulis: You mentioned part of this roughly $3 million will go to create long-term ecosystem stewardship plans at former landfills. What exactly might that entail?
So my understanding is that they're going to be working on not only the landfill pieces of this, but putting in those native pollinator gardens to help bring back the natural habitat and the ecosystem, and obviously having resilient gardens and nature trees and everything else really helps to support and to create climate resilience. Like I said, it'll include planting more natural native plants, but also native trees to plant around the periphery of the landfills and host community events to plant those trees.
Earlier on, you mentioned that this funding was part of an overall $4.3 billion in climate pollution reduction grants announced by the EPA now it also includes the so-called Clean Corridor Coalition in New Jersey, which is part of the EPA Region 2 that you lead, along with Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland. What will this project do along the I-95 corridor?
Yes, so we are super excited about our other grant in the region, which is the Clean Corridor Coalition. And this is the lead applicant is the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, but it's a coalition of states, so it includes Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland, and New Jersey's leading, as I said. And this is for $250 million and we're really excited about that one because it really focuses in on the I-95 corridor, reducing some of the diesel and gas emissions and pollution from those vehicles by building out infrastructure for charging stations for those medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. And that, like I said, is $250 million to really focus in on infrastructure for commercial zero-emission infrastructure. And the great thing about this one also is, as we know, a lot of times, the communities that abut or are adjacent to the I-95 corridor are low-income, and so in reducing the greenhouse gasses from those trucks and vehicles we’ll be improving the air quality along the roads, and a lot of times they are low-income. So this is really a win-win for reducing pollution across the corridor in low-income communities or communities of color. But we also know tackling greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle traffic and truck traffic helps to reduce many different pollutants, so not just greenhouse gasses, things like particulate matter and other pollution that comes from our transportation sector, which also is a huge contributor to climate change, and so tackling the transportation sector is another win for Region 2 and for those states along the corridor.
Levulis: In the past several weeks, your office released the latest five-year Hudson River cleanup review – General Electric cleaning up contaminants in the waterway there. As a result of some of that report, environmental advocates in our listening area have accused the EPA of punting on the release on the question of if the cleanup has been satisfactory. Wanted to get your reaction to that.
So, as we mentioned, the five-year review is based on the data that we have. And you know, one of the things about Superfund sites, unfortunately, is they take a long time to really clean up, and here we want to be deliberate and follow the science and make sure that we really understand the trajectory of the cleanup and how much has been achieved. So one of the things that we have said all along is that you need 8 to 10 years of data, and because we're on a timeline to issue this five-year report, while I know communities aren't satisfied, we had all along said when we get the data from 2025, we're going to review it and reassess and evaluate the cleanup progress. And so that is why it's important for everyone to understand. One, this is out for public comment, so make sure that you comment on the report. But two, that we have committed to issuing an interim report. We're not going to wait another five years. Once we get that eighth year or ninth year of data, we're going to review it, share it with the public, and we may, and I've said this before, EPA may have to go back and make a determination on the protectiveness of that original remedy. And so we're committed to, one, relying on the science, obviously, but two, getting back out to the public even before that next five-year marker to ensure that we make a determination on where the cleanup is headed.
