Press Release: 82% of North Carolina voters support state action to reduce single-use plastics

82% of North Carolina voters support state action to reduce single-use plastics

RALEIGH, NC — In a new statewide poll of North Carolina voters, a significant majority expressed concern about the health impacts of plastics and said state lawmakers should take action to reduce single-use plastics.

Support for state government action to reduce single-use plastics was widespread and bipartisan: More than eight out of ten (82%) North Carolinians support enacting policies to protect human health and the environment. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of Republican and 91% of Democratic voters support reducing single-use plastics.

Recent studies and media reports have linked the presence of plastics in the human body to obesity, heart attack, stroke, falling sperm counts, infertility, premature births, birth defects, developmental disorders, and possibly Parkinson’s and dementia. Nearly nine out of ten (88%) North Carolinians said they were concerned about the health effects of plastic, with 50 percent of those saying they were very concerned.

Statement from Hartwell Carson, French Broad Riverkeeper with the Western North Carolina-based conservation organization MountainTrue:

“Ensuring that our food, water, and environment are safe and free of dangerous plastic pollution is widely supported by young and old, women and men, and Republicans and Democrats. With a resounding 82% of North Carolinians calling for action, it’s imperative that corporations quit forcing single-use plastics on us. We don’t want it. Sound policy can move us away from the detrimental impacts single-use plastics cause. In the meantime, businesses should be working to phase them out..”

These poll results mirror surveys conducted by the City of Asheville in 2023, which found that more than 80% of respondents supported a citywide plastic bag ban, and by the Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce (2017), in which all but two of 500 respondents opposed overturning a popular local bag ban.

Special Interests Blocked Popular Local Laws. Now, It’s Time for the State to Act

In 2023, Durham was on the cusp of passing a 10-cent fee on disposable plastic and paper bags. In Western North Carolina, Buncombe County, the City of Asheville, and the towns of Black Mountain, Weaverville, and Woodfin were moving toward enacting local ordinances that would ban single-use plastic shopping bags at the checkout aisle and styrofoam takeout containers.

As those local laws moved forward, Senate Leaders conspired with special interest lobbyists from the North Carolina Retail Merchants Association to insert language into the state budget blocking local governments from enacting any regulations on “the use, disposition, or sale of an auxiliary container (153A-145.11)”, including styrofoam containers and single-use plastic bags. The omnibus budget containing these new limits on local governments was released to the public and to the House and Senate for an up-or-down vote without opportunity for debate or amendment. Governor Roy Cooper later allowed it to become law without his signature.

Environmental and public health advocates around the state regrouped and are now focusing their efforts on building support for and passing a state-wide ban on single-use plastic bags and takeout containers.

Statement from Steve Wall, MD, a retired pediatrician and member of the Plastic-Free WNC Health Working Group:

“Our legislators have a constitutional duty to safeguard the health and well-being of the people of North Carolina. It’s time for North Carolina to join the more than 500 state and local governments across the United States that have already passed commonsense laws to reduce single-use plastics. This is not just an environmental imperative—it’s a public health necessity.”

The Rise of the Plasticene Era: Plastics’ Significant Impact on Human Health

The theme of Earth Day 2024 is Plastic vs. Planet, and environmental and health advocates worldwide are calling for a 60% reduction in the production of plastics by 2040 for the sake of human and planetary health.

The production of plastics has seen an exponential increase since the 1950s, now accounting for 20% of global fossil fuel usage—surpassing its use in vehicles and electricity generation. This shift marks the dawn of what many scientists are calling the “Plasticene” era, characterized by significant environmental and health impacts due to pervasive plastic production and waste.

Despite the common practice of recycling, the reality remains stark; less than 6% of plastic waste in America is recycled. The lower cost of producing new plastics compared to recycling only exacerbates the issue, leading to increased plastic waste that often ends up in landfills and natural environments. Over time, these materials break down into microplastics that infiltrate the air, water, and even our food supply.

Research indicates that the average individual inhales approximately 22 million plastic particles each year. Studies have confirmed the presence of plastics in various human tissues and bodily fluids, including blood, brain, lungs, colon, liver, placenta, breast milk, and carotid arteries.

The impact of plastics on human health is becoming increasingly clear. Microplastics can penetrate cellular structures, disrupting energy production and promoting inflammation. They also interfere with hormonal functions, impacting brain communication, immune responses, and organ function. The consequences are severe, linking plastic pollution to a range of health issues including infertility, premature births, various cancers, and even neurodegenerative diseases. Research has shown that plastics in arterial plaques could increase the risk of severe cardiovascular events by up to 4.5 times within a three-year period.

The economic burden is also significant, with diseases related to plastic exposure costing approximately 1% of the US GDP annually. As the problem of plastic pollution grows, its pace is outstripping our ability to fully understand and mitigate its impacts on human health and the environment.

About the Poll

This poll was conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, Inc. of Jacksonville, Florida from April 9 through April 13, 2024. A total of 625 registered North Carolina voters were interviewed statewide by telephone.

Those interviewed were randomly selected from a phone-matched North Carolina voter registration list that included both land-line and cell phone numbers. Quotas were assigned to reflect voter registration by county.

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than ± 4 percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the “true” figure would fall within that range if all voters were surveyed. The margin for error is higher for any subgroup, such as a gender or age grouping.

About Plastic-Free WNC

Plastic-Free WNC is a coalition of environmental organizations, advocates, and citizens dedicated to reducing plastic pollution in our environment. Members include MountainTrue, Sierra Club of WNC, Environmental Action Community of Western North Carolina, Riverlink, Creation Care Alliance of WNC, Beloved Asheville, Asheville En Espanol, NRDC, NCPIRG, and the North Carolina Plastics Coalition. Learn more at PlasticFreeWNC.com.

Media Contact:
Karim Olaechea, MountainTrue
Phone: 828-400-0768 E-mail: karim@mountaintrue.org

###

Making a Difference in the Blue Ridge Mountains: MountainTrue and Sugar Hollow Solar Join Forces

Photos: MountainTrue Executive Director Bob Wagner (left) and Sugar Hollow Solar CEO and co-founder Doug Ager (right).

Something exciting is brewing in the heart of the Southern Blue Ridge Mountains — a new collaboration between MountainTrue, an organization deeply rooted in environmental activism, and Sugar Hollow Solar, a forward-thinking solar power company. This partnership isn’t just about harnessing the sun’s energy; it’s about fostering a community committed to a greener, more sustainable future.

Solar Power and Community Empowerment: A Winning Combination

From now until September 30, 2024, Sugar Hollow Solar is running an inspiring referral program. For every new customer who signs a solar contract based on your referral, Sugar Hollow Solar will generously donate $50 to MountainTrue. And that’s not all – as a token of appreciation, you, the referrer, will receive $250. But if you’re feeling particularly generous, you can opt to have the full $300 benefit go to MountainTrue, further boosting their vital environmental efforts.

More Than Just a Business

Doug Ager, the CEO and co-founder of Sugar Hollow Solar, puts it best: “We’re more than a business. We’re part of the community, committed to our planet.” This ethos is why Sugar Hollow Solar’s partnership with MountainTrue is such a perfect match. Together, we are working towards a clean energy future, a mission that MountainTrue has championed since its early days.

A Legacy of Environmental Protection

MountainTrue’s journey began in 1982 with the Western North Carolina Alliance’s (renamed MountainTrue after a merger in 2015) fight against oil and gas exploration in the Nantahala-Pisgah National Forests. The organization has achieved significant victories in the years since, including stopping clear-cutting in Pisgah-Nantahala National Forests, preventing a nuclear waste dump near Leicester, and playing a key role in passing essential environmental legislation.

A Heartfelt Thanks

Bob Wagner, MountainTrue’s executive director, expresses profound gratitude to the team at Sugar Hollow Solar. He highlights Doug Ager’s commitment to public service, green job creation, and tackling climate change – core components of MountainTrue’s mission.

Join the Solar Movement

Since 2010, Sugar Hollow Solar has been instrumental in helping many Southern Blue Ridge mountain households switch to solar power, reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Their expertise in solar panel systems has made a significant impact across several counties — as of February 22, 2024, 977 home and business systems have been installed since 2010!

How to Get Involved

To be a part of this impactful program, visit Sugar Hollow Solar’s Referral Page, send an email to hello@sugarhollowsolar.com, or give them a call at (828) 776-9161. Together, we can make a difference in the Southern Blue Ridge Mountains and beyond.

Tell Madison County to Oppose Dangerous Industrial Biomass Facilities

The Madison County Planning Board is expected to vote on whether to recommend changes to the county’s land-use code that would allow dangerous, industrial biomass facilities in Madison County. The proposed amendments to the county’s land-use ordinance open the door to industrial-sized biomass facilities that would emit more climate-changing carbon into the atmosphere, cause significant air pollution, and pose serious fire risks to nearby residents.

Take Action: Email the Planning Board and County Commissioners and let them know you want a clean and safe Madison County.

BACKGROUND:

In response to public feedback, the board has significantly revised the definition of what constitutes a large biomass facility, requires they obtain a special permit, and restricts their operations to industrial-zoned areas of the county. Here are the latest revisions to the definition of a “large biomass facility”:

“A facility that converts biomass sources into value-added products energy for public or private use. Biomass includes but is not limited to wood and wood processing waste, wood pellets, agricultural crops and waste materials, biogenic materials in municipal solid waste, animal manure, and human sewage.”

Large Biomass Facility:

Annual Biomass Throughput: A large biomass facility processes over 5,000 metric tons of biomass per year.
Energy Production: A large biomass facility generates over 10,000 MWh or more energy annually.
Number of Employees: A large biomass facility has over 50 employees
Capital Investment Threshold: A large biomass facility requires an investment of over $5 million.

This broad definition raises three key concerns:

Inconsistencies in Regulation: The definition of “large biomass facility” appears to include activities already separately defined and regulated within the ordinance, such as sawmills and certain manufacturing facilities. This inconsistency in regulation creates confusion for residents, business owners, and the County in determining which set of rules applies to specific activities.
Potential for Unintended Consequences: An overly broad definition could inadvertently allow certain activities, such as a sawmill evolving into a wood pellet production facility, to escape more stringent permitting requirements. This could occur because nonconforming land uses (i.e., land uses that pre-date an ordinance amendment that makes them newly “nonconforming”) are typically allowed to continue as long as they do not change their primary use or expand significantly. Therefore, a clearer definition is needed to prevent such loopholes.
Unfair Scope: The proposal’s distinction between “large” and “small” biomass facilities does not serve the public or the ordinance’s purposes. It would both allow industrial-scale facilities in residential areas while punishing truly “small” biomass land uses—especially under the currently overbroad definition of “biomass”—by requiring regular folks to go through an expensive and time-consuming set of rezoning and permitting processes. The ordinance should focus on making sure industrial biomass facilities are properly located without sweeping up landowners looking to make occasional, harmless use of collected waste materials. Failing to make this distinction may lead to unnecessary hostility towards environmental advocacy and regulation.

A More Refined Definition

To address these concerns and create a more precise and effective regulatory framework, we propose a more tailored definition of “large biomass facility.” Our suggested definition would:

Apply only to facilities that produce biomass products for specific off-site uses, such as electricity generation, heating, or transportation fuel.
Tailor the amendment so that if the facility combusts biomass on site, the definition applies only if any electricity generated is transmitted for off-site use.
Include wood pellet biomass facilities explicitly within the definition to ensure they are adequately regulated.
Maintain the broad definition of “biomass” while narrowing the scope of facilities that fall under this definition.

Additional Considerations

In addition to refining the definition of “large biomass facility” to help distinguish between different types of biomass-related activities, we support:

Requiring special use permits for biomass facilities,
Correcting what may have been a mistake in section 8.11.12 (“Noise”) that regulates facilities that generate noise pollution “up to 70 decibels.” We believe the county meant “more than 70 decibels.

ACTION: Stop the NCGA from Stripping Local Governments of Authority to Fight Plastic Pollution

Breaking News: A draft conference report of the state budget released to the media includes language that would prohibit counties (§ 153A-145.11) and cities (§ 160A-205.6) from passing ordinances, resolutions, or rules that would restrict, tax, or charge a fee on auxiliary containers — the definition of which includes bags, cups, bottles, and other packaging.

This language would preempt local control and undermine existing provisions of the NC Solid Waste Management Act that give counties and cities the authority to ban single-use plastic bags and other forms of packaging and the use of plastic foam (e.g., styrofoam) in foodware.

Plastic pollution is a threat to our environment and to the health of North Carolina residents. Email your legislators and let them know that our right to protect ourselves from dangerous pollutants is too important to be traded away to fossil fuel and retail industry lobbyists in backroom deals.

Language in NC Budget Would Strip Local Governments’ Ability to Pass Plastic Bag Bans and Other Waste Reduction Efforts to Protect Environment, Public Health, Landfills and Recycling Centers

Media Contacts:

Karim Olaechea, Deputy Director of Strategy & Communications at MountainTrue
(828) 400-0768, karim@mountaintrue.org

Katie Craig, State Director at NCPIRG
kcraig@ncpirg.org

Ken Brame, President of the Sierra Club’s Western North Carolina Group
(828) 423-8045,kenbrame10@gmail.com

Michelle B. Nowlin, Co-Director at Duke Environmental Law and Policy Clinic
(919) 613-8502, nowlin@law.duke.edu

For Immediate Release

Raleigh, September 19 — A draft conference report of the state budget released to the media includes language that would prohibit counties (§ 153A-145.11) and cities (§ 160A-205.6) from passing ordinances, resolutions, or rules that would restrict, tax, or charge a fee on auxiliary containers — the definition of which includes bags, cups, bottles, and other packaging.

This language would preempt local control and undermine existing provisions of the NC Solid Waste Management Act that give counties and cities the authority to ban single-use plastic bags and other forms of packaging and the use of plastic foam (e.g., styrofoam) in foodware. The inclusion of the preemption in the budget comes as both Asheville and Durham are considering ordinances to reduce plastic pollution, and the towns of Woodfin and Black Mountain have passed resolutions in support of a Buncombe County-wide ordinance. In 2021, Wilmington also passed a resolution encouraging the reduction of plastic waste.

Efforts to reduce plastic waste are popular among citizens and businesses. A survey from the City of Asheville received nearly 7,000 resident responses and showed support at 80%. Among 57 businesses surveyed in the Asheville area, there was widespread support for a waste reduction ordinance banning single-use plastic bags, plastic takeout containers, and styrofoam products.

The following are statements from representatives of organizations working to reduce plastic pollution:

Hartwell Carson, French Broad Riverkeeper (a program of MountainTrue):
“Plastic pollution is a threat to our environment and the health of North Carolina residents. Our right to protect ourselves from dangerous pollutants is too important to be traded away to fossil fuel and retail industry lobbyists in backroom deals. We urge our elected officials to remove any such language and pass a clean budget.”

Sarah Ogletree, Director of the Creation Care Alliance of WNC (a program of MountainTrue):
“This ban is about loving our neighbors—protecting the air and water we all need to survive and thrive. The General Assembly should not prevent us from living our faith by caring for God’s creation.”

Katie Craig, State Director of the North Carolina Public Interest Research Group:
“Plastic waste threatens our health, environment, and communities. Our cities and counties often bear the impacts of our plastic waste problem, from managing recycling and landfill facilities to cleaning up litter in our parks and waterways. So, they should have a say in how their communities address the problem too. By preempting local authority to regulate single-use plastic bags, this provision threatens to undermine the ability of cities and counties in North Carolina to take meaningful steps towards sustainability, environmental protection, and the wishes of their own communities.”

Ken Brame, President of the Sierra Club’s Western North Carolina Group:
“At a time when we are seeing record heat waves and flooding due to Climate Change, why would the NC General Assembly prevent local governments from reducing carbon-intensive plastic bags? Microplastics from plastic bags are being ingested and are becoming a health risk. The General Assembly should care more about the health of its citizens than the profits of the plastic industry.”

Susannah Knox, Senior Attorney, Southern Environmental Law Center:
“This is a short-sighted attempt to take control from local governments trying to serve their communities by protecting public health and cleaning up their streets and creeks. Citizens and businesses across the state have expressed overwhelming support for reducing plastic pollution, and politicians in the General Assembly should not stand in their way.”

If you or your organization, club, or business would like to voice their support for a Plastic-Free WNC, please contact karim@mountaintrue.org.

# # #

Make your voice heard: Duke Energy’s rate hikes are unfair!

The North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) recently approved the disappointing Carbon Plan, which gives Duke Energy the green light to pursue a combination of energy sources, including gas and nuclear, to achieve North Carolina’s carbon reduction goals. Now, before any concrete plan of action is presented, Duke Energy Progress is asking NCUC to approve rate hikes that will be imposed on customers for the next three consecutive years. This three-year rate structure was authorized as part of the legislation that also mandated the creation of the Carbon Plan.

You have a chance to make your voice heard! NCUC is hosting a series of public hearings across the state, and they kick off in the mountains on March 6 at 7 p.m. at the Haywood County Courthouse:

What: Duke Energy Progress Rate Hike Public Hearing

When: Monday, March 6, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.

Where: Haywood County Courthouse, 285 N. Main St, Courtroom 2-A, Waynesville, NC

Energy is getting more expensive, burdening everyone, especially low-income households. Last summer, customers experienced an average monthly energy bill increase of $10.58 due to rising gas prices. The following monthly increases are expected on the average residential electric bill if Duke Energy Progress gets its way:

$14.72 per month starting fall 2023, followed by
$5.62 per month in 2024, followed by
$5.21 per month in 2025

By 2026, the average annual residential electric bill will be $306.06 higher than it is today. To put this in perspective, workers making minimum wage will have to work an extra two and a half weeks per year to pay their energy bills if this rate hike is approved. Duke Energy Progress customers already spend an average of 19% more on their electric bills than Duke Energy Carolinas customers. Why should Progress customers’ rates go up even more? Check this map to find out if you’re a Duke Progress or Duke Carolinas customer.

Duke’s justification for the rate hikes is largely for new distribution and transmission grid upgrades. Making our grid more reliable is important, and we need to build out the power distribution grid to better accommodate new renewable energy development like wind and solar. But, in addition to building out a robust transmission grid, Duke needs to maximize investment in energy efficiency measures to help low-income customers offset rising energy costs. Duke now has the ability to use “performance-based ratemaking” mechanisms that incentivize clean energy investments to benefit both the utility and the public. Duke underutilized this opportunity in its rate hike application. NCUC should aggressively require that Duke’s profits be tied to achieving public policy goals such as low-income energy affordability, decarbonization, and investments in energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy resources.

We need to tell NCUC to minimize rate increases on customers, advance aggressive goals around energy efficiency, affordability, and renewable sources through performance-based ratemaking, and pursue other strategies to protect and support low-income customers from rising costs. Be there on March 6 to make your voice heard!

For more detailed talking points and pointers for how to engage in the hearing, click here. Thanks to our good partners at NC Sierra Club for pulling these together!