People Before Profit blog

Obama talks clean energy jobs, LA launches solar rooftop program

Fri, 28 Jun 2013 16:19:00 +0000

"Over the past four years, we've doubled the electricity we generate from wind and solar power," said President Obama during an important June 25 speech on climate change. "And that means jobs. Jobs manufacturing the wind turbines, jobs installing the solar panels." It also marks a significant step, albeit a small one, away from toxic fossil fuels, and that move can be seen throughout the U.S. Now, Los Angeles will be taking steps of its own: the city's Department of Water and Power (DWP) is implementing the largest-ever urban rooftop program.

The program essentially involves the establishment of solar panels on the roofs of apartment buildings and homes, with the first installation having begun atop an apartment complex in North Hollywood on June 26. As part of the program, the DWP will buy solar power technology from businesses, including the company Solar Provider Group, which supplied the panels for the North Hollywood project. The company will reportedly hire at least 30 new local workers over the next 18 months; this is right in line with what the president pointed out: a correlation between clean energy development and jobs.

Obama's climate change response plan, which he described during his speech, includes doubling "our energy from the wind and sun." As it is, he said, "solar panels now generate more than four times the power at less cost than just a few years ago. Today we use more clean energy, which is supporting hundreds of thousands of good jobs."

The goal of LA's DWP plan is to generate at least 150 megawatts of solar electricity, which is enough to power 30,000 homes. The Solar Provider Group plans on investing $15 million in 17 different projects around L.A. The DWP has stated that it hopes to swap renewable energy for fossil fuels.

"In the next decade, the LADWP will completely replace over 70 percent of its power supply with clean energy, to eliminate coal through a combination of increased energy efficiency," said Democratic LA mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa. "This is a defining moment for our city's environmental future. Not only will these commitments create hundreds of green jobs, they will further bolster Los Angeles as a national leader in making the successful, cost-efficient transition to renewable energy. If you want proof that environmental progress and economic growth go hand in hand, look no further" than this project. "We are shaking our fossil fuel addiction."

Other states are following suit. New Jersey's Board of Public Utilities approved a $446 million solar energy plan on May 28, which will involve converting 800 closed landfills and 10,000 abandoned industrial areas into solar farms. The state's solar industry currently employs some 3,000 workers and comprises nearly 500 businesses. Those numbers are expected to increase as solar farm development skyrockets there.

Though Obama admitted, "transitioning to a clean energy economy takes time," he also pointed out that the "doomsayers [should not] trot out the old warnings that these ambitions will somehow hurt our energy supply." Perhaps referencing places like Los Angeles, the president added, "States and cities across the country are already taking it upon themselves to get ready."

Photo: Solar panels at the New Jersey Army National Guard Joint Training and Training Development Center, covering 71,000 square feet of the building's roof. Flickr

Obama climate change speech important, but just a step

Wed, 26 Jun 2013 12:06:00 +0000

President Obama made an important speech on climate change on June 25. He announced several policies to be implemented using his executive authority. Al Gore said it was the "best presidential address on climate" ever.

The speech and the steps Obama announced are very positive for a number of reasons. First and possibly most importantly, he argued for the necessity of tackling climate change, declaring that "we don't have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society." His advocacy of action to address climate change is one piece of convincing even more millions of people that we don't have time to waste. This helps turn the agenda away from the deniers and procrastinators, from the oil and coal company executives and owners who want to continue making excess profits while they still can.

Obama called on the people of our country to demand action by political leaders at all levels - to invest in renewable energy, to divest from fossil fuel companies, to force politicians to promote sensible climate change laws as a condition of winning the support of voters. He called on citizens to "make their voice heard."

The steps he announced, from regulating emissions of greenhouse gases from new and existing power plants, to setting a goal of 10 gigawatts of renewables produced on public lands by the end of this year, are worthwhile in their own right. While these actions do not and can not accomplish as much as major congressional legislation, they do move the U.S. as a country from the obstacle to the solution side of the ledger.

Obama, while punting the final decision on the controversial Keystone XL pipeline down the road, set the crucial precedent that permits should be denied unless there is proof that the pipeline won't increase carbon dioxide emissions. This is an application of the precautionary principle, a variation of the medical admonition to "first do no harm."

We should applaud the fact that Obama, after mentioning climate change in both his inaugural address and in this year's State of the Union speech to a joint session of Congress, is following up with real action. If he moves forward on his determination to make progress on these environmental issues in his second term, it will be yet another historical accomplishment of his administration.

Some have already derided his directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon dioxide emissions as merely telling the agency to perform its job, including following court decisions requiring the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. However, given the already furious Republican opposition to any action by the EPA, Obama's public reaffirmation is another positive step. While not exactly a "new" policy, it does engage in the battle already ongoing over EPA regulations.

These steps build on the environmental accomplishments of Obama's first term, increasing fuel economy standards significantly and investing in renewable energy, using the stimulus to support a more robust renewable energy industry and to invest in research.

While appreciating the positive nature of his speech and the policies he announced, it is clear that these actions still fall far short of what scientific knowledge calls for. Climate change does not just threaten even more extreme weather events like last year's Hurricane Sandy; it imperils many natural systems on which developed human existence depend. Much more is required, and congressional Republicans and coal-state Democrats are playing an obstructionist role, preventing the more far-reaching action that humanity needs.

While Obama's proposals may be the maximum that is currently politically possible in the U.S., what is really required is a massive effort on many fronts - changing transportation, agriculture, military policy and production; regulating pollution-producing industries; research in many areas of energy, climate, weather, production; retrofitting existing buildings with much more substantial insulation; instituting new building code requirements and federal procurement policies - to mention a few areas where major progress is needed.

The fight over the Keystone XL pipeline continues, and the next battle in the Senate will be over the confirmation of Gina McCarthy as new EPA administrator. Already, Republican senators are placing a hold on her nomination and threatening to filibuster any vote on her confirmation. These are just two of many battles to come.

Photo: Flickr (CC)

Detroit protests tar sands facilities

Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:01:00 +0000

DETROIT - When you hear how bad it is, you understand their passion. Monday, alongside the Detroit River, community and environmental activists, members of the Detroit Committee Against Tar Sands (DCATS) stopped large trucks carrying petcoke from entering a Koch Brothers owned facility. There it is stored in forty-foot piles under the open skies to be shipped on barges.

Tia Lebherz explained that pipelines bring the "really dirty" tar sands oil, harvested in Canada, across the Midwest. One of those lines ends up at Marathon Petroleum Corporation in Detroit where a product of the refinery process is petcoke.

Headed to a Koch Brothers owned facility on the river, big trucks, like the ones being blocked, weave their way through neighborhoods in Southwest Detroit carrying loads of petcoke. With each trip, the most polluted zip code in the state, 48217, gets even dirtier.

Lebherz said one of the places petcoke is shipped is DTE Energy Co's coal powered Monroe power plant, on Lake Erie where it's a big contributor to the carbon dioxide being released.

City resident Stephen Boyle said petcoke is nasty stuff containing "chromium, nickel, selenium, and other heavy metals." He said it blows throughout the neighborhood, goes into storm water drains and has even blown over the streets in Windsor, Canada on the other side of the river.

McKenzie Duke lives within yards of those windswept piles. She moved here a year ago and didn't open her windows until the weather warmed in April. "All this black dust came in. It was all over my floors and my furniture. You can't use a 'swiffer' to pick it up; you have to use solvents. You walk your dog, you're breathing it. It's in our hallways, our garage." She now lives with the windows closed.

Speaking for DCATS, she presented a reasonable list of demands that included creating new forms of working and living that "don't force folks to choose between a paycheck, food on their table, and a job that jeopardizes the planets ability to support life."

She also demanded the government not issue permits that allows corporations to "pay to pollute," to stop the extraction of tar sands and to transition beyond fossil fuels.

Rev. Charles Williams, from the National Action Network, said the Koch Brothers and Marathon are making a lot of money taking advantage of Detroit and Michigan. They feel they can do whatever they want, but "this water belongs to everybody," he said.

Lebherz said the tar sands infrastructure seems to be "growing daily" as Marathon just completed a $2.2 billion dollar expansion to process even more of the oil.

Looking at the whole production process, she declared, "From start to finish, these tar sands are a terrible idea."

Photo: John Rummel/PW

Miami could become "American Atlantis;" Obama talks climate

Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:52:00 +0000

Rising sea levels and storm surges - the inevitable byproducts of climate change - will turn Miami, Florida into the "American Atlantis," putting the city underwater by the end of the century, according to experts. Harold Wanless, chair of the University of Miami's geological sciences department, said the state's flat topography puts "more than $416 billion in assets at risk to storm-related flooding and sea level rise." That rise is already 60 percent greater than was expected from 1990 through 2011. And as Obama so pointed out in a climate change-focused speech today in D.C., preventative measures must be taken.

Coastal studies researcher Orrin H. Pilkey of Duke University advised coastal communities to prepare for a rise of at least five feet by 2100. Australian scientist and sea level expert John A. Church added, "I think we need to immediately begin thinking about our coastal cities. How are we going to protect them? We can't afford to protect everything. We will have to abandon some areas."

"Miami, as we know it today, is doomed," predicted Wanless. "It's not a question of if. It's a question of when. Flooding everywhere, pooling in streets, flooding parking lots, turning intersections into submarine crossings - this is what global warming [will] look like. If you live in South Florida and you're not building a boat, you're not facing reality."

"South Florida is toast," agreed Florida climate change policy advocate Tom Gustafson. "Even if we cut carbon pollution overnight, it won't save us." And anyway, "those solutions are not likely to be forthcoming from the political realm. You can't even say the words 'climate change' on the House floor without being run out of the building."

But even if, as Gustafson points out, slashing carbon output won't prevent the floodpocalypse that awaits Miami, it will certainly help. And President Obama made significant headway on that front today at a speech in Georgetown University. He announced a plan that will limit carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, amongst a variety of other environmental initiatives. The Obama administration does not need Congressional approval for this, thanks to a 2007 Supreme Court decision that gave the Environmental Protection Agency additional regulatory powers. The emphasis will be placed on cutting the carbon output of coal-fired plants.

Obama also discussed the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, arguing that if it exacerbates greenhouse gas emissions, the project should not move ahead. "The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project can go forward," he said.

"Our planet is changing in ways that will have profound impacts on all of humankind," the president continued. "As a president, as a father, and as an American, I'm here to say, 'We need to act.'"

The pending disaster that may hit Southern Florida stands as just one example of how climate change is going to make everything harder, and how it is prudent for appropriate measures to be taken now. For more recent examples of devastation through inaction, one can easily look to Hurricane Katrina-ravaged New Orleans, and post-Hurricane Sandy New York and New Jersey.

As of right now, there's a lot of work to do, say experts. "There is no planning, no serious thinking going on," remarked Florida disaster impact analyst Chuck Watson. And it goes beyond just the climate change denial frequently exhibited by Republicans in Congress: "It is beyond denial, it's flat-out delusional."

After all, as the president concluded today, "Sticking your head in the sand may make you feel safer, but it won't guard against the coming storm."

Photo: In this 2009 photo, a man struggles to walk his dogs in flooded Miami Beach, Florida. maxstrz/Flickr (CC)

Nurses march across Golden Gate Bridge to protest Keystone

Fri, 21 Jun 2013 16:05:00 +0000

SAN FRANCISCO - Members of the National Nurses United union and environmentalist allies marched on June 20 across San Francisco's famed Golden Gate Bridge in the latest show of opposition to the proposed and controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline. Members of Unite Here, Local 2850, joined the march.

The nurses were attending a three-day conference on a wide range of causes, including taxing financial transactions and counteracting anti-union actions worldwide, along with the battle against government austerity. But Keystone, from the Canada-Montana border to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries, drew the most public attention.

That's because the pipeline would transport 800,000-900,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta's tar sands - notoriously "dirty" oil filled with pollutants - to the coast, foes say. They contend its extraction would also endanger the water table and increase global warming. Keystone supporters dispute those claims.

The Obama administration is weighing whether to grant an environmental permit to TransCanada, the pipeline sponsor, to build the northern section. The southern segment, starting in Oklahoma, was approved. Construction unions say Keystone's assembly would create 10,000 jobs - and they would be union jobs, since TransCanada long ago signed a Project Labor Agreement with TransCanada to have unionists build it.

"TransCanada already agreed to go above and beyond the industry norm when building Keystone by agreeing to 57 safety conditions" the government recommended, Building Trades Department President Sean McGarvey said previously. The pipeline "passed every analysis and review" and "would meet all applicable environmental and safety standards. Meanwhile, additional American job creation and economic growth from this important project has been delayed," he added. "Jobs can't wait."

But the NNU and its allies contend construction workers could find employment on projects other than Keystone, such as retrofitting buildings to create energy efficiency. NNU members also warn of other harms Keystone would cause.

"We need to reduce effects of environmental factors, including climate change, that are making people sick, and endangering the future for our children. That's why we oppose Keystone," union co-President President Deborah Burger, RN, said beforehand.

"As a maternity nurse, the list of chemicals in the tar sands oil are a pregnant woman's nightmare," Oakland, Calif., RN Katy Roemer told a pre-march rally. "We are talking about impacting not only our current generation of men, women and children but also the next in the case of a spill. We do not have the capacity to adequately clean up the chemicals we know are in tar sands oil and we do not even know the full list of those chemicals. The ones we do know about are awful."

Photo:Nurses, activists, community members march across the Golden Gate Bridge with 350.org (National Nurses United).

Emission Impossible: Obama plans to cut carbon output

Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:56:00 +0000

As part of a planned comprehensive climate change strategy, President Obama will announce an effort in July to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, targeting power plants, one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases. This will be one aspect of a larger agenda that will focus on three broad environmental areas over which the Obama administration has rule-making powers. The other efforts will be improving the energy efficiency of appliances and expanding clean energy development.

Curbing carbon emissions will be a major step in the battle against global warming, one that follows a successful mercury emission reduction plan (the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards) enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency in January 2012. Those safeguards are expected to prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks per year. The upcoming preventative measures, meanwhile, will go several steps further, and are expected to become a powerful tool in not only improving health, but significantly slashing greenhouse gas emissions - perhaps by 40 percent or more in the long term.

Obama's plan, of course, is bound to be strongly criticized by Republicans, and may even need to face legal challenges by the GOP and fossil fuel industries. The administration's initiative would be taken with executive power; it would not need legislative action or financing by Congress, according to Heather Zichal, White House coordinator for energy and climate change.

Such plans were part of Obama's climate change talk in a June 19 speech in Berlin, Germany. He explained that the nation and the world have a moral imperative to take action to fight global warming. "The grim alternative affects all nations; more severe storms, more famine and floods, new waves of refugees, coastlines that vanish, oceans that rise," he said. "This is the global threat of our time. We have to get to work."

Zichal added that climate change is a "second term priority" for the president, who "knows this is a legacy issue. The administration has already begun steps to restrict climate-altering emissions from any newly-built power plants, but imposing carbon standards on the existing utility fleet will be vastly more costly. But the EPA has been working very hard on rules that focus specifically on greenhouse gases from the coal sector. They're doing a lot of important work in that space."

She remarked that leaders in Washington need to start listening to the public on this issue, and, moreover, to "catch up" with public opinion on climate change. "Most Americans have stopped debating whether the planet is warming, and are busy trying to protect their communities from its impact."

The EPA was given the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in a 2007 Supreme Court decision, and therefore, in this instance, does not need to contend with Republicans' obnoxious habit of fighting environmental legislation tooth and nail.

"We are encouraged to find that there are tools available to do this without Congress," said Nicholas Bianco, who authored a World Resources Institute report on greenhouse gas output and its potential reduction. "The other encouraging sign is that the administration appears to be ready to tackle climate in this second term."

Carbon output increased by 1.4 percent in 2012, reaching an all-time high of 31.6 gigatonnes. Such emissions have caused droughts and heat waves, exacerbated tropical cyclones and changed storm patterns, harmed agriculture production, and caused sea levels to rise.

Al Gore recently said that climate change was a highly important issue in which the president certainly ought to work around the roadblocks put up by Congress; this plan is expected to be one of the first big examples of that. "It is important for him to regulate carbon dioxide emissions," Gore said. "He doesn't need Congress to do [this]. If it hurts the feelings of people in the carbon polluting industries, that's too bad. Just because the opponents of doing anything on global warming are trying to intimidate people into not even considering it, that is no reason for the rest of us to conclude that this is impossible. We have to win the conversation and change the law and put [limitations] on carbon."

"The effort to slow climate change requires bold action," Obama continued. "Peace with justice means refusing to condemn our children to a harsher, less hospitable planet."

Photo: Alexander F. Yuan/AP

Major oil-water spill darkens Alberta, Canada

Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:26:00 +0000

In the wetlands of northern Alberta, Canada, outside the town of Zama City, everything is stained with the thick, pungent blackness of oil. The waters there are filled with nearly three million gallons of a salty oil-water mixture, in what is one of the largest North American spills in recent history.

Trees and other vegetation are dying, and wildlife is in danger. The substance has poisoned tributaries in the area, and threatens to reach the nearby Zama River. Following a seemingly endless slew of environmental tragedies, this latest spill is just one more disaster and one more ecosystem endangered.

The spill was first reported on June 1, but the full extent of the damage was not made public until June 12. It is the result of a leaking produced-water pipeline, which has since been plugged. Produced-water is an oil industry term for water mixed with oil that comes up from the ground when crude is extracted. It is an unstable mixture of hydrocarbons, high salt levels, sulfur compounds, metals, and naturally-occurring radioactive materials, making it a deadly toxic cocktail for the environment. The leak is believed to have begun months ago, but went largely unnoticed until June 1.

The pipeline was operated by Houston, Texas-based Apache Corp., whose spokesman Paul Wyke insists that the "salty water" only contains "trace amounts of oil," and that the company has "seen no impacts" on wildlife. So far, "the Zama River has not been impacted," he added, "and there is no risk to the public." Apache is reportedly working with the Energy Resources Conservation Board to determine what caused the leak.

For the Dene Tha' First Nation, which governs tribal communities that live near the area, the attempt by the corporation to downplay the extent of the damage is in vain. Dene Tha' chief James Ahnassay said, "Every plant and tree has died in the area touched by the spill." He believes that waterfowl have already died from the toxicity, and that more animals are in danger. He suspects that the pipeline leak is just one more example of a lack of government oversight in the oil industry. "We don't believe that the government is doing enough to ensure upgrades and maintenance of the pipelines."

Greenpeace Canada said that the affected area is a vital habitat for birds and other wildlife. Group spokesman Keith Stewart said the oily wastewater's compounds are a major hazard to those animals. "This is a massive spill of toxins into one of the most important wetlands in Canada, if not the world." "The government shouldn't be trying to hide these things," he said, blasting officials for not releasing exact details of the spill until June 12. Greenpeace further noted that Apache has not yet allowed actual photos of the spill to be released.

In recent years, it seems, major oil disasters are increasingly occurring within months of each other. The Alberta incident follows another major event, the March, 2013 Mayflower, Arkansas oil spill in the U.S., which occurred when the ExxonMobil-owned Pegasus pipeline leaked. That one caused irreparable damage and directly affected a town full of people, who are still dealing with the aftermath, which has sickened many and will last for years.

And the devastation of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is still being felt, despite BP's claims of successful cleanup efforts. In fact, the oil corporation has - prematurely - finished wrapping up those efforts in three of the four affected states. Environmental restoration has barely begun there; it could take decades. But even though "one million barrels of oil from the disaster remain unaccounted for," according to the National Wildlife Federation's David White, BP is too busy footing the bill for a new beachfront hotel to be built on state park property near Gulf Shores, Alabama. The company considers the hotel construction part of its promised 'coastal restoration' efforts, while infuriated environmentalists feel that money should go toward rebuilding the decimated wetlands.

It's worth mentioning that conditions in the Gulf haven't improved since then. Far from it. Instead, another incident occurred near the Gulf in April 2013, when a pipeline malfunction at an ExxonMobil refinery sent oil gushing into the waters near Chalmette, Louisiana.

Pipelines, by the way, are more likely to cause oil spills than shipments of crude by rail, according to a study by the International Energy Agency, using U.S. Department of Transportation data. The study found that pipelines in the U.S. gushed three times more oil than trains for comparative distances over an eight-year period.

Back in Canada, the provincial government of Alberta would point out that the number of pipeline-related spills there has been dropping steadily since 2011, but their database is reportedly missing data in several places, and does not record certain spills that cross national borders. And anything under about 528 gallons doesn't get counted. Another important fact is that most of Alberta's pipelines are 40 to 50 years old, and thus in drastic need of an update.

The issues in Canada also illustrate the dangers of pipeline oil transportation in America. Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune remarked, "Oil companies cannot be trusted to transport toxic crude through America's backyards, farmland, and watersheds."

With the ever-looming threat of the Keystone XL pipeline project, which would bring oil in directly from Alberta, the immense environmental dangers that oil companies pose must be addressed.

Photo: A bird in the Gulf suffers from BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill. As with that disaster, the Alberta, Canada spill is believed to have affected water fowl. (Charlie Riedel/AP)

Redwood forest suffers for Game of Thrones-style wedding

Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:56:00 +0000

Napster and Facebook co-founder Sean Parker decided to have a $2.5 million Game of Thrones-inspired wedding right in the middle of a California redwood forest, putting the ecosystem there at risk, as well as several threatened species of fish. He must now pay $1 million in penalties to the state for violations. But of course, it was all in the name of celebrity hubris and - just maybe - an example of taking fantasy fandom a bit too far.

For his marriage to singer Alexandra Lenas, Parker (who was portrayed by Justin Timberlake in The Social Network) felt the need to plop a stone dance floor, lighting effects, staircases, a fake cottage, bridges, and artificial ponds and waterfalls into the middle of the woods. He did not obtain any necessary permits to do all this, nor would he likely have received them if he had tried. The redwood trees there have been potentially damaged by possible erosion from exposure to the concrete and wedding "set pieces."

"The unpermitted development has thus impcted the redwood forest habitat and has likely caused sedimentation of Post Creek," according to a report by the California Coastal Commission, Post Creek is a small body of water there that is home to endangered fish.

Anti-erosion mechanisms, which could have prevented some of the damage, were not used in the man-made structures.

Lenas reportedly took care to appear identical to Game of Thrones character Daenerys Targaryen, while the wedding decorations were largely modeled after medieval fantasy like The Lord of the Rings. But beneath all the Tolkienesque glamor, this was really just another overblown wedding celebration for the One Percent, and the environment paid the price.

As Grist.org put it, "It's hard to decide what's more depressing about this. Is it that you can f*ck up the Earth if you can afford it? Or that Parker made no significant effort to limit erosion and redwood damage? That the wedding industrial complex makes people think they're entitled to [blatant] displays of excess?"

As an interesting side note, the wedding is the latest example of the rising popularity of Game of Thrones, the television show based on George R. R. Martin's epic fantasy book series A Song of Ice and Fire. The series looks set to establish a fandom to rival that of Star Trek. Ironically, the series touches upon the extravagant lives of its wealthy royal main characters, to whom Parker himself could be compared.

Parker later tried to defend the exorbitant wedding in an email to The Atlantic, where he argued that the forest was not in pristine shape in the first place, and that it was a factor in his decision to have the wedding there. He also claimed to spend some of his money on conservation efforts and said he had enlisted the help of Save the Redwoods to point out an ideal site for him to use. While Save the Redwoods did suggest the area that Parker used, an uncomfortable fact remains: "Parker fell in love with the landscape," said writer Yoni Applebaum. "But instead of adapting his wedding to its demands and limitations, he adapted the environment to suit the wedding."

The bottom line of Parker's argument was that his intention was not to harm the environment, and that "it's impossible to get everything right at a production of this scale."

But as Gawker writer Sam Biddle noted, "It's clear that Parker didn't give a damn about the consequences. He and his wife wanted a dream wedding with elven cottages, and they were going to get it. When you help make Facebook a billion-strong global entity, you don't worry about permits. Permits are for the rest of us."

Photo: A stone platform with a wall, staircase, and potted plants, all built in the middle of an otherwise pristine and ancient redwood forest. California Coastal Commission