EPA Seeks Advice on Perchlorate in Drinking Water – Agency Issues Interim Health Advisory

Release date: 01/08/2009

Contact Information: Enesta Jones, (202) 564-4355/7873/ jones.enesta@epa.gov

(Washington, D.C. – Jan. 8, 2009) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is seeking advice from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) before making a final determination on whether to issue a national regulation for perchlorate in drinking water.

The agency also is issuing an interim health advisory of 15 parts per billion (ppb) to assist state and local officials in addressing local contamination of perchlorate in drinking water and making a corresponding change to the factors it considers in cleaning up Superfund sites. States have the right to establish and enforce drinking water standards, and EPA encourages state-specific situations to be addressed at the local level. EPA expects to issue a final health advisory concurrent with the final regulatory determination for perchlorate.

“This is a sensible step for protecting public health and preserving regulatory options as the science of perchlorate is reviewed,” said Benjamin H. Grumbles, EPA’s assistant administrator for water.

On Oct. 10, 2008, the agency issued a preliminary regulatory determination for public comment in the Federal Register. The notice described the agency’s decision that there is not a “meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction” through a national drinking water regulation for perchlorate. The agency received more than 32,000 comments on the notice.

After considering public comments, as well as recommendations from EPA advisory groups and offices, EPA is asking the NAS to provide additional insight on various issues. Specifically, EPA is asking the NAS to evaluate its derivation of the Health Reference Level of 15 ppb, the use of modeling to evaluate impacts on infants and young children, and the implication of recent biomonitoring studies. The agency is also asking the NAS how it should consider the role of perchlorate relative to other iodide uptake inhibiting compounds and if there are other public health strategies to address this aspect of thyroid health.

EPA is replacing the existing preliminary remediation goal of 24.5 ppb with the interim health advisory value of 15 ppb. This goal will be used as a consideration when establishing cleanup levels for perchlorate at Superfund sites.

A regulatory determination is a formal decision by EPA as to whether it should initiate development of a national primary drinking water regulation for a specific contaminant under the Safe Drinking Water Act. EPA has drinking water regulations for more than 90 contaminants. Every five years, EPA develops a Contaminant Candidate List to consider for regulation and then makes regulatory determinations on some of the contaminants based on scientific information on health effects, occurrence in drinking water and the opportunity for risk reduction.

A health advisory provides technical guidance to federal, state, and other public health officials on health effects, analytical methods and treatment technologies associated with drinking water contamination. Health advisories also contain guidance values that are concentrations of a contaminant in drinking water that are likely to be without adverse health effects.

More information on the perchlorate health advisory: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/unregulated/perchlorate.html

Stimulating Our Way to Rock Bottom

Dr. Ron Paul – U.S. Congress, TX, 14th District

With attention turning to the next big economic stimulus package, questions are still swirling about our economic troubles. How did we get here? How do we get out? As usual, Washington has all the wrong answers. According to many politicians, we got here by not spending enough, not consuming enough, and not regulating enough. Now government, like some mythical white knight, is going to ride in to save the day by blanketing the economy with dollars, hiring an army of new bureaucrats, creating make-work jobs, and sending everyone some form of a bailout check. The debate seems to focus on whether this will cost enough to save the economy, or if this is just a “down payment” with much more government spending to come. Talk like that would be comical, if the results weren’t going to be so tragic.

The results will be worsening economic woes until we learn our lesson. But instead Congress is behaving like drug addicts who must hit rock bottom before they are ready to face reality. They are playing foolish games with the economy now because they are thinking only of political expedience. This talk of job creation is a perfect example.

Contrary to the belief of many, the goal of the economy is not job creation. Jobs can be a sign of a healthy economy, as a high energy level can be a sign of a healthy body. But just as unhealthy substances can artificially give the addict that burst of energy that has nothing to do with health, artificially created jobs just exacerbate our problems. The goal of a healthy economy is productivity. Jobs are a positive outcome of that. A “job” could be to dig a hole one day, and fill it back up the next, or perhaps the equivalent at a desk. This does no one any good. But the value in that paycheck ultimately has to come from taxing someone productive. Some think this round-robin type of economic model is supposed to get us somewhere.

Politicians and bureaucrats have already done their fair share to ensure that jobs in the private sector are prohibitively complicated and expensive to create. They are now shocked that the economy is shedding jobs, and want to simply create hundreds of thousands of jobs to make up for the job losses, through another so-called economic stimulus package. The private sector must be permitted to do that, but instead they are massively burdened with taxes and webs of red tape and regulation. Washington’s bandaids will only prolong this agony. The Austrian school of economics teaches that only a free market economy, unencumbered by onerous government controls, creates long-term prosperity. Politicians, however, tend to be notoriously short-sighted.

I am left with these questions – who is going to be left standing to tax in the private sector to pay for all these public sector make-work jobs? Is Washington really to be considered some sort of savior for creating unproductive jobs in place of the productive jobs they eliminated?

We are at an economic dead-end and those in power are in denial. The truth is our economic problems are due to loose monetary policy, central economic planning, and the parasitic expenses of government. Unless we assess these problems honestly, we unfortunately have a long way to go until, like the junkie, we hit rock bottom.

Researchers focus on bringing bees back

By GENARO C. ARMAS
The Associated Press

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. – The mysterious decline in honeybees has generated renewed interest into finding new ways to boost bee numbers.

Buoyed by public concern over honeybee hives afflicted with colony collapse disorder, researchers are focusing on how the habitat surrounding a hive can affect the health of the honeybees and native bees like bumblebees.

“The more of these pollinator-friendly areas we have … the more likely we are able to retain bee species,” said Karen Goodell, an ecology professor at Ohio State University whose project focuses on native bees.

Separately, scientists in labs trying to unravel the mystery over colony collapse disorder are focusing on how pesticides and other chemicals used in fields and gardens might affect honeybees, bumblebees and other insects that pollinate crops.

In both cases, researchers want to know how much of what’s outside can affect what’s happening inside the hive.

Bees are vital to American agriculture because they pollinate many flowering crops, including almonds, apples and blueberries.

But honeybees, a non-native species from Europe, are the pollinators of choice in American agriculture because they are easier to manage and are more plentiful , a single colony can contain 20,000 workers. Bumblebee colonies, for instance, may only have a couple of hundred worker bees.

The honeybees have taken a hit over the years by mites and, most recently, colony collapse disorder, in which beekeepers have found affected hives devoid of most bees. Bees that remain appear much weaker than normal.

Beekeepers in 2006 began reporting losing 30 percent to 90 percent of their hives. Since then the annual loss rate has been roughly 33 percent, according to government estimates.

The first case of colony collapse disorder was officially reported in Pennsylvania, and Penn State University has been spearheading research. Maryann Frazier, a senior extension associate at the school’s entomology department, said researchers remain concerned about the number and combination of pesticides that have been detected in decimated hives.

“We realize it’s much more complicated than what we thought a year ago,” Frazier said earlier this month. “From what we know now, it’s not something we’ll figure out very, very quickly.”

Native pollinators are also being monitored. The National Academy of Sciences in 2006 found declining populations of several bee species, along with other native pollinators like butterflies, hummingbirds and bats.

The report suggested that landowners can take small steps to make sure habitats are more “pollinator friendly,” like by growing more native plants.

And that’s what scientists appear to be doing on a larger scale across the country in hopes of bringing bees back.

One such track is at the Environmental Research Institute at Eastern Kentucky University, where apiculturalist Tammy Horn oversees an experiment in apiforestation, a term described by the school as a “new form of reclamation focused on planting pollinator-friendly flowers and trees.”
click here!

The project is in its first year. Horn is working with local coal companies to plant trees, shrubs, and native wildflowers on reclaimed lands that would be attractive to pollinators, rather than the once-typical scenario of planting only high-value hardwoods to establish a timber industry.

There are years of study still to go, though there are no signs of colony collapse disorder so far, Horn said.

Local support from residents and coal companies has been encouraging to Horn. It helps that locals have family ties to beekeeping, with parents and grandparents perhaps dabbling in the hobby before it started to become less popular locally.

The rallying point has been concern about the disappearing bees, she said.

“That’s been important for my project to succeed,” Horn said in a phone interview. “Even people who don’t care about beekeeping show up to (beekeeping workshops) in Eastern Kentucky and know it’s important. They like showing up on mine sites to see that coal mines care enough to invest in it.”

The idea is intriguing enough to draw interest for similar projects in other parts of the country, including California and Pennsylvania.

“It’s a fantastic idea,” said Dennis vanEnglesdorp, acting state apiarist for the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. “It’s just a matter of finding time to do everything properly. It’s one of the ways forward for sure.”

At Ohio State, Goodell’s project is housed at The Wilds, a private, nonprofit conservation center located on nearly 10,000 acres of reclaimed mine land in rural southeastern Ohio.

“It’s not as much a scientific study as a ‘Let’s do this and see what happens,’” Goodell said.

Her work deals with native bees, rather than honeybees, though the plight of the honeybees has drawn more attention to all pollinators, she said. The goal is to find the right mix of plants and trees to build native bee populations.

“Those populations would then be contributing to colonizing areas that have lost bees because of poor management,” Goodell said. “Definitely, these bees will be playing a role in pollination services.”

It’s a tact similar to that taken by projects that focus on native pollinators promoted by Mace Vaughan, the pollinator program director at The Xerces Society, a Portland, Ore.-based nonprofit organization.

Its mission, according its Web site, is to “protect wildlife through the conservation of invertebrates and their habitat.”

Vaughan worries that U.S. agriculture might be too dependent on honeybees, though, as with Goodell, programs there have drawn increased interest because of the attention on the honeybee decline.

AAFES sales are high, but experts debate health effects of popular drinks
By Mark Abramson, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Mark Abramson / S&S
Worldwide sales of Red Bull and other energy drinks at Army and Air Force Exchange facilities climbed from about 950,000 units in 2006 to more than 2.47 million in 2008. Dentists and health experts worry about how those drinks can affect people’s health.
Top-selling cold beverages at AAFES for 2008
1. Monster energy drink (16 oz.)
2. Red Bull energy drink (16 oz.)
3. Coke Classic (12 oz.-24 pack)
4. Mountain Dew (20-oz. bottle)
5. Red Bull (8.3 oz.)
6. Mountain Dew Fridge Mate
(12 pack)
7. Monster low carbonated energy drink (16 oz.)
8. Pepsi Fridge Mate (12 pack)
9. Red Bull (12-oz. can)
10. Coke Classic, (20-oz. bottle)

Source: Army and Air Force Exchange Service

Sport drink sales (by container)
2006 – 2,372,620
2007 – 2,330,132
2008 – 2,287,917

Energy drink sales (by container)
2006 – 954,008
2007 – 1,777,057
2008 – 2,475,475
Servicemembers’ thirst for something with a little more oomph than a soda or cup of joe has added some kick to the Army and Air Force Exchange Service’s energy drink sales numbers. But, are those drinks good for you?

According to AAFES, its energy drinks sales worldwide rocketed from 954,008 containers in 2006 to 2,475,475 in 2008. The sales of sport drinks, such as Gatorade and Powerade have declined from 2,372,620 containers to 2,287,917 in the same time span. Energy drinks, such as Red Bull and Monster, now account for five of the top 10 cold beverage sellers at AAFES facilities. Monster energy drinks, 16-ounce sizes, are the No. 1 seller.

“New energy drink flavors seem to evolve and innovate themselves to meet changing demands,” AAFES spokesman Army Lt. Col. David Konop said via e-mail.

Although energy drinks may be healthy for AAFES’ sales figures, guzzling those drinks may not be so good for the consumer, military officials warned.

“I think there are more (health) minuses than pluses,” said Todd Hoover, director of the Army Wellness Center in Heidelberg, Germany, and replication manager for Army wellness centers in Europe. “These are just empty calories because there is no nutrient value in the drinks.”

High caffeine and other ingredients that have the same properties are part of the problem with the drinks, Hoover said.

A 2006 study in the Analytical Journal of Toxicology showed that energy drinks contain up to 141 milligrams of caffeine per serving, compared to 65 to 120 milligrams for coffee and 20 to 40 milligrams for soda.

Hoover said it is unclear what the long-term health effects are of energy drinks because there haven’t been any legitimate studies on the subject. But he said he is concerned about how popular these drinks are becoming — especially downrange.

Energy drink consumption is widespread downrange, where troops are taking coolers full of the drinks with them before they go out on missions and using them to stay awake, Hoover said. He said witnessing that after a recent trip to the Middle East was an eye-opening experience.

But some studies have shown that the drinks are good at improving reaction times, feelings of well-being and energy, Europe Regional Medical Command officials said. Studies have also shown that consuming energy drinks may cause an increased heart rate, nausea, restlessness and tremors.

Dentists worry about the sugar levels.

“Any drink that has a high sugar content, which a lot of these drinks do, could lead to an increase in tooth decay or cavities,” said Air Force Col. Blake Edinger, a doctor of dental surgery at Ramstein Air Base in Germany.

“Every time you take a sip of that drink … the sugar coats the teeth and the bacteria in the mouth attacks that sugar and that forms an acid and that acid will attack the teeth for up to 20 minutes,” Edinger said.

But despite the high sugar and caffeine content, one dental expert said the jury is still out on the effects of energy drinks.

“There are still a lot of studies going on,” said Army Col. Jose Conde, chief of staff for Europe Regional Dental Command. “The energy drinks, some of them don’t have carbonation, but they are very acidic.”

Conde said he is concerned about AAFES’ eye-popping sales figures.

“It could potentially be a big problem, especially if (servicemembers) drink it during deploying status. Their oral hygiene could be a big problem.”

Dione Saturn's Moon

Saturn’s icy moon Dione has undoubtedly experienced geologic activity since its formation, as evidenced by the tectonic faults and craters on its surface.

To create this enhanced-color view, ultraviolet, green and infrared images were combined into a single black and white picture that isolates and maps regional color differences. This “color map” was then superposed over a clear-filter image. The origin of the color differences is not yet understood, but may be caused by subtle differences in the surface composition or the sizes of grains making up the icy soil.

This view looks toward the leading hemisphere on Dione.

Image Credit:NASA/JPL

U.S. Army Pvt. Gregory Lloyd searches for munitions near Forward Operating Base Kalsu, Iraq, Dec. 29, 2008. Lloyd is assigned to 1st Battalion, 2nd Infantry Regiment, 172nd Infantry Brigade.
U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Wendy Wyman

January 12, 2009

NOAA’s Fisheries Service has issued regulations and a letter of authorization to the U.S. Navy to impact marine mammals while conducting training exercises around the main Hawaiian Islands. The regulations require the Navy to implement measures designed to protect and minimize effects to marine mammals.

The Navy requested authorization under the Marine Mammal Protection Act because the mid-frequency sound generated by tactical active sonar, and the sound and pressure generated by detonating explosives, may affect the behavior of some marine mammals or cause a temporary loss of their hearing.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service does not expect the exercises to result in serious injury or death to marine mammals, and is requiring the Navy to use mitigation measures intended to avoid injury or death. However, in a small number of cases, exposure to sonar in certain circumstances has been associated with the stranding of some marine mammals, and some injury or death potentially could occur despite the best efforts of the Navy. Therefore, the regulations and the letter allow for incidental impacts on marine mammals, including injury or death of up to 10 animals of each of 11 species over the five years covered by the regulations.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service has determined that these effects would have a negligible effect on the species or stocks involved.

Under the regulations and the letter, the Navy must follow mitigation measures to minimize effects on marine mammals, including:

establishing marine mammal safety zones around each vessel using sonar;
using Navy observers to shut down sonar operations if marine mammals are seen within designated safety zones;
using of exclusion zones to ensure that explosives are not detonated when animals are detected within a certain distance;
implementing a stranding response plan that includes a training shutdown provision in certain circumstances and a memorandum of agreement to allow the Navy to contribute in-kind services to NOAA’s Fisheries Service if the agency has to conduct a stranding response and investigation;
establishing an area of extra caution in the Maui Basin because of its high density of humpback whales.
These measures should minimize the potential for injury or death and significantly reduce the number of marine mammals exposed to levels of sound likely to cause temporary loss of hearing.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service and the Navy worked to develop a robust monitoring plan to use independent, experienced aerial and vessel-based marine mammal observers (as well as Navy watch standers), passive acoustic monitoring, and tagging to help better understand how marine mammals respond to various levels of sound and to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures. The implementation of this monitoring plan is included as a requirement of the regulations and the letter.

The Navy has been conducting training exercises, including the use of mid-frequency sonar, in the Hawaiian Islands for more than 40 years. Exercises range from large multi-national, month-long training exercises using multiple submarines, ships, and aircraft conducted every other year, known as Rim of Pacific Training Exercises, to two- to three-day exercises to test the readiness of battle groups, known as Undersea Warfare Exercises or USWEXs, and shorter exercises that last less than a day. In addition, some exercises involve the use of explosives.

This regulation, in effect for five years, governs the incidental take of marine mammals during the Navy’s training activities, and includes required mitigation and monitoring measures. The letters of authorization, which are required for the Navy to legally conduct their activities, are issued annually, provided the Navy abides by the terms and conditions of the letter, submits the required annual reports, and shows their activities do not result in more numerous effects or more severe harm to marine mammals than were originally analyzed or authorized.

NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service is dedicated to protecting and preserving our nation’s living marine resources and their habitat through scientific research, management and enforcement. NOAA’s Fisheries Service provides effective stewardship of these resources for the benefit of the nation, supporting coastal communities that depend upon them, and helping to provide safe and healthy seafood to consumers and recreational opportunities for the American public. To learn more, visit NOAA’s Fisheries Service Web site.

January 13, 2009

NOAA today submitted the first ever report to Congress identifying nations – France, Italy, Libya, Panama, the People’s Republic of China, and Tunisia – whose fishing vessels were engaged in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing in 2007 or 2008.

This opens the way for continued consultations between the U.S. government and officials of each of the six nations to encourage them to take corrective action to stop IUU fishing by their vessels.

Bluefin tuna, one of the species that are most affected by illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.

High resolution (Credit: NOAA)
“Illegal fishing is a global problem that is depleting fish stocks and hurting the economies of nations and the livelihoods of people who depend on sustainable fishing,” said Dr. Jim Balsiger, NOAA acting assistant administrator for NOAA’s Fisheries Service. “Our report is part of stepped up efforts called for by Congress to work with other nations to stop illegal fishing on shared fish stocks.”

Annual global economic losses due to IUU fishing are estimated to be about $9 billion, according to an international task force on IUU fishing.

According to NOAA’s report, the identified nations had fishing vessels that did not comply with measures agreed to under various international regional fishery management organizations. In the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, fishing vessels of identified nations were using illegal fishing gear, fishing during a closed season, or not complying with reporting requirements. Failure to report catch and effort data to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas hampers the ability of that regional fishery management organization to conduct vital stock assessments used to manage and rebuild stocks, such as the severely depleted eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna.

In the Pacific Ocean, an identified nation had vessels that violated an international rule requiring any vessel fishing for tuna in the eastern Pacific Ocean be listed in the vessel register for the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, the regional fishery management organization that manages tuna stocks in that area.

Today’s identification of nations follows two years in which NOAA’s Fisheries Service, working with the U.S. Department of State, conducted extensive outreach at bilateral and multilateral meetings to inform fishing nations of the new international measures to combat IUU fishing under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act.

The act, signed into law in 2007, amends the High Seas Driftnet Moratorium Protection Act to require the U.S. to strengthen international fishery management organizations and address IUU-fishing and the bycatch of protected living marine resources. Specifically, the Moratorium Protection Act now requires the secretary of commerce to identify in a biennial report to Congress those foreign nations whose fishing vessels are engaged in IUU fishing or fishing activities or practices that result in the bycatch of protected living marine resources. The act also now requires the secretary to certify whether these identified nations have stopped IUU fishing and the bycatch of protected resources.

Today’s identification will be followed by consultations to urge nations to adopt corrective measures. Following consultations, NOAA will formally certify each of the six nations either as adopting effective measures to stop IUU fishing, or having vessels engaged in IUU fishing. If a nation is found to be engaged in IUU fishing, that nation’s vessels may be denied entry into U.S. ports and the president may prohibit imports of certain fish products from that nation or take other measures.

Today’s report to Congress also includes information on the status of living marine resources around the globe and multilateral efforts to improve stewardship of these resources.

NOAA also has just released a proposed rule that outlines the procedures for identifying and certifying nations for IUU fishing and bycatch of protected living marine resources. A draft environmental assessment of the rule is also now available. You can read the Report to Congress, the draft rule and environmental assessment online.

NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Please be seated. Thank you for coming, and Happy New Year. Laura and I thank all of our distinguished guests, starting with members of my Cabinet — Secretary Kempthorne, Secretary Gutierrez, Administrator Johnson. Admiral, thank you for coming today. We’re proud you’re here. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. Other members of the administration who have joined us. Members of the conservation community, we’re glad you’re here.

Governor, I am proud you’re here. Thank you for coming. And Josie is with you. Representatives from — by the way, Northern Mariana Islands — Governor. Just in case you don’t know him. (Laughter.) We know him — and we like him. And all the representatives from America Samoa, really appreciate you all coming. Apologize for the weather, but I don’t apologize for the policy, because we’re fixing to do some fabulous policy.

It’s interesting that we’re gathered a few steps from the office once occupied by a young Assistant Secretary of the Navy named Theodore Roosevelt. Not long after he left the position, he was back on these grounds as the 26th President of the United States. And exactly a hundred years ago, he embarked on his final weeks as the President — something I can relate to. (Laughter.)

President Roosevelt left office with many achievements, and the most enduring of all was his commitment to conservation. As he once said: “Of all the questions which can come before the nation, short of the actual preservation of its existence in a great war, there is none which compares in importance with leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us.”

That spirit has guided the conservation movement for a century; it’s guided my administration. Since 2001, we have put common-sense policies in place, and I can say upon departure, our air is cleaner, our water is purer, and our lands are better protected.

To build on this progress, I’m pleased to make several announcements today. Under the Antiquities Act that Theodore Roosevelt signed in 1906, the President can set aside places of historic or scientific significance to be protected as national monuments. With the proclamations I will sign in a few moments, I am using that authority to designate three beautiful and biologically diverse areas of the Pacific Ocean as new marine national monuments.

The first is we will establish the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument. At the heart of this protected area will be much of the Marianas Trench — the site of the deepest point on Earth — and the surrounding arc of undersea volcanoes and thermal vents. This unique geological region is more than five times longer than the Grand Canyon. It is deeper than Mount Everest is tall. It supports life in some of the harshest conditions imaginable. A fascinating array of species survive amid hydrogen-emitting volcanoes, hydrothermal vents that produce highly acidic and boiling water, and the only known location of liquid sulfur this side of Jupiter.

Many scientists — and I want to thank the scientists who have joined us today — believe extreme conditions like these could have been the first incubators of life on Earth. As further research is conducted in these depths, we will learn more about life at the bottom of the sea — and about the history of our planet.

The other major features of the new monument are the majestic coral reefs off the coast of the upper three islands in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. These islands, some 5,600 miles from California, are home to a striking diversity of marine life — from large predators like sharks and rays, to more than 300 species of stony corals. By studying these pristine waters, scientists can advance our understanding of tropical marine ecosystems not only there, but around the world.

The second new monument will be the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument. The monument will span seven areas to the far south and west of Hawaii. One is Wake Island — the site of a pivotal battle in World War II, and a key habitat for nesting seabirds and migratory shorebirds. The monument will also include unique trees and grasses and birds adapted to life at the Equator; the rare sea turtles and whales and Hawaiian monk seals that visit Johnston Atoll; and some of the most pristine and spectacular coral reefs in the world. These isolated specks of land and abundant marine ecosystems are almost completely undisturbed by mankind. And as part of the Pacific Remote Islands National Monument, they will be ideal laboratories for scientific research.

The third new monument will be the Rose Atoll Marine National Monument. Rose is a diamond-shaped island to the east of American Samoa — our nation’s southernmost territory. It includes rare species of nesting petrels, shearwaters, and terns — which account for its native name, “Island of Seabirds.” The waters surrounding the atoll are the home of many rare species, including giant clams and reef sharks — as well as an unusual abundance of rose-colored corals. This area has long been renowned as a place of natural beauty. And now that it’s protected by law, it will also be a place of learning for generations to come.

Taken together, these three new national monuments cover nearly 200,000 square miles, and they will now receive our nation’s highest level of environmental recognition and conservation. This decision came after a lot of consultation — consultation with local officials, consultation with prominent scientists, consultation with environmental advocates, consultation with the United States military and the fishing community. Based on these consultations, as well as sound resource management principles, the monuments will prohibit resource destruction or extraction, waste dumping, and commercial fishing. They will allow for research, free passage, and recreation — including the possibility of recreational fishing one day. For seabirds and marine life, they will be sanctuaries to grow and thrive. For scientists, they will be places to extend the frontiers of discovery. And for the American people, they will be places that honor our duty to be good stewards of the Almighty’s creation.

The benefits of today’s decision reach far beyond nature. The monuments will preserve sites of cultural and spiritual significance to native peoples. They will ensure full freedom of navigation, and include measures to uphold training missions and other military operations. And they will open the door to new economic benefits in the Territories. After all, if travelers now, or students, or scientists, book a ticket to Saipan or Pago Pago, they will know they’re headed for a place with friendly people and a vibrant culture, and some of our country’s most treasured natural resources.

This morning I’m also pleased — today I’m also pleased to share some news about two other national treasures. One is the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument, which I created in 2006. This stunning island chain is the largest single conservation area in American history, and the largest fully protected marine area in the world. And the other is Mount Vernon — the home of America’s first President and an agricultural pioneer — that would be George Washington. I’m pleased to announce the United States will soon submit a request that these two landmarks become UNESCO World Heritage sites — America’s first such submission in 15 years.

The new steps I’ve announced today are the capstone of an eight-year commitment to strong environmental protection and conservation. Look, I know that sounds contrary to the conventional wisdom of many in the news media. But let me just share a few facts about our record — and you can be the judge for yourself:

Since 2001, air pollution has dropped by 12 percent. The strictest air quality standards in American history are now in place, as are strong regulations on power plant and diesel engine emissions. More than 3.6 million acres of wetlands have been protected, restored, or improved. Millions of acres of vital natural habitat have been conserved on farms. More than 27 million acres of federal forest land have been protected from catastrophic wildfires. The maintenance backlog in our national parks has been reduced. More than 11,000 abandoned industrial brownfields are on their way back to productive use. We’ve had a new focus on cleaning debris from our oceans. Popular recreational fish like the striped bass and red drum are gaining new protection. And new marine protected areas are helping improve the health of our fisheries off the southeast coast.

At the same time, we’ve taken aggressive steps to make America’s energy supply cleaner and more secure — and confronted the challenge of global climate change. I signed two major energy bills. We raised fuel efficiency standards for automobiles for the first time in more than a decade. We mandated major increases in the use of renewable fuels and the efficiency of lighting and appliances.

We dedicated more than $18 billion to developing clean and efficient technologies like biofuels, advanced batteries and hydrogen fuel cells, solar and wind power, and clean, safe nuclear power. We’re providing more than $40 billion in loan guarantees to put these technologies to use.

We forged an international agreement under the Montreal Protocol mandating major cuts in refrigerants that are some of the most potent greenhouse gases. We built international consensus on an approach that will replace the Kyoto Protocol with a global climate agreement that calls for meaningful commitments to reduce greenhouse gases from all major economies, including India and China.

With all these steps, we have charted the way toward a more promising era in environmental stewardship. We have pioneered a new model of cooperative conservation in which government and private citizens and environmental advocates work together to achieve common goals. And while there’s a lot more work to be done, we have done our part to leave behind a cleaner and healthier and better world for those who follow us on this Earth.

And now I’d like those who have been assigned the task of standing up here to join me as I sign the national monuments. (Applause.)

By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY
Here’s a bright spot in an overcast economy: Solar panel prices are tumbling.

Prices for rooftop solar systems, including installation, already have fallen 8% to 10% since October and are expected to drop another 15% to 20% this year.

Fueling the trend are an oversupply of worldwide manufacturing capacity and lower demand, especially in Spain and Germany, which have been growth engines for the industry.

For U.S. homeowners, effective prices are likely to plunge by more than 50% after figuring in a bigger federal tax credit that took effect Jan. 1.

“The era of extremely expensive (solar) modules is over,” says analyst Nathaniel Bullard of research firm New Energy Finance.

Since 2004, solar prices have been propped up by a shortage of capacity to make both silicon the raw material for solar-power systems and finished panels. Meantime, the Spanish and German governments have paid system owners hefty subsidies to generate solar power, turbocharging sales in those countries.

Manufacturers responded by building a wave of factories. Then Spain and Germany slashed this year’s incentives. In the U.S., the biggest solar investors were banks such as Morgan Stanley that can no longer benefit from tax credits because of insufficient profits.

New Energy projects an oversupply of nearly 4 gigawatts of solar modules in 2009, or enough electricity to supply 2.6 million homes.

The glut is already dragging down prices. Barry Cinammon, CEO of Akeena Solar, one of the nation’s largest installers, says wholesale prices have fallen about 15% since October. Since installation accounts for about half the cost of a system, total costs are down about 8%. SunPower, one of the largest solar makers, expects its retail prices for installed systems to dip as much as 20% this year.

“Now, all of a sudden, we have module manufacturers calling us,” says Peter Rive, chief operating officer of Solar City, the No. 1 installer.

Consumers can reap even bigger gains if they can buy in a recession.

Until this year, homeowners who bought solar systems were eligible for a tax credit that shaved system prices 30%, but the credit was capped at $2,000. Last fall, Congress renewed the 30% credit and removed the cap, lopping thousands more dollars off solar price tags.

In California, which accounts for nearly 70% of the U.S. solar market, a typical 4-kilowatt, $32,000 solar energy system cost a homeowner about $23,000 last year after state and federal incentives. This year, if prices sink as expected, that system is likely to cost $10,000 to $12,000.