News/Announcements

At the general meeting on January 14, the CFGBA issued an offical statement regarding the cement plant proposed for our area by Titan America. 2009 board of directors chair Todd King also read a statement regarding the organization's policy on membership. Both of these statements are posted below, followed by an explanation of the lengthy process that was undertaken by the board in order to arrive at these statements.

Titan Statement

The Cape Fear Green Building Alliance mission statement reads as follows: “The Cape Fear Green Building Alliance (CFGBA) mission shall be to promote building practices that are environmentally responsible, health conscious, and financially sound.”

The CFGBA shares the concerns outlined by such groups as the NC Coastal Federation, Cape Fear River Watch, NC Fisheries and Wildlife, and others, in regards to the local cement plant project currently being proposed by Titan America.

The Board wishes to make it clear that the CFGBA is not an advocacy group, and that the focus of the CFGBA is, and shall remain, on green building. Though cement is used in the production of concrete, and concrete is a building material, we feel that the details of mining, the manufacturing processes, and their impact on the environment are simply outside of the scope and expertise of this organization.

However, based on environmental studies from groups that are more directly related to those areas, such as those mentioned above, the CFGBA feels that the impacts on the wetlands, ground water, and air quality in this environmentally-sensitive area appear to make it an unsuitable location for this cement plant.

While we recognize the membership’s strong feelings about this sensitive issue, we feel that true progress can only be made by communication with those whose environmental policies we would like to influence. Aside from the various environmental issues relating to the specific location of this project, we would like to acknowledge Titan’s stated interest in taking positive steps above what is required of them, for a cement production facility. However, we would strongly encourage Titan to take this opportunity to further reduce the environmental impacts inherent in cement production.

Membership statement

Regarding questions over issues of Titan Corporation’s membership in the CFGBA, it must be realized that denying Titan’s request for membership would set a precedent that would require us to develop a protocol to qualify individuals and/or companies based on their level of “greenness” before allowing them to support this organization. Even if that direction was chosen, from a practical standpoint it would be impossible for us to grow and operate under such a protocol. By joining the CFGBA as a member or sponsor, individuals and/or companies are supporting this organization. Membership or sponsorship in no way indicates a reciprocal support of such individuals or businesses by the CFGBA. Therefore, the CFGBA will be accepting the membership application forwarded to us from Roanoke Cement, a subsidiary of Titan from Greensboro, NC.

Explanation of the process resulting in the Titan and Membership statements written by Skye Dunning, 2008 chair

The CFGBA board of directors discussed the possibility of releasing a statement regarding the proposed Titan cement plant on several occasions during 2008.  There were several concerns regarding issuing a statement, but the political consequences of doing so were not among them.  If it appears to some that the CFGBA has remained neutral for political purposes; that is a misconception for which I offer my personal, and the board’s, profound apologies.  We have not consciously attempted to remain neutral for political or any other reasons.  In fact, we had a discussion at one of our monthly general meetings in which we asked those present how we could facilitate dialogue or otherwise help with this issue.

One of the things discussed in our board meetings were concerns over making a statement about something in which we were not the experts.  We feel that groups like the Sierra Club, CFRK, Coastal Land Federation, etc., are more knowledgeable of the specific issues & were doing an effective job at raising awareness of those issues.  If the issue were that they were mining for aggregate in an area of high radon which could cause radon problems in the poured concrete on site (this is an actual problem), then we would have clearly seen it as our issue and wanted to make a statement.

We went into this year as a young organization, still developing and lacking essential business systems, procedures, & policies.  We had a list of items to be completed by the end of this year intended to give us a solid foundation on which to base our future growth.  A list that is still not complete.  We were concerned that investing the proper amount of time & energy required to make a statement on Titan that we would be comfortable with would have detracted from this other work, critical to our future. 

In Oct. of 2008, we did vote to release a statement.  A first draft was written & presented to the board, but it was not picked up by the board members due to the consuming details of out biggest events of the year, the solar/green building tour, expo, & annual social.

Titan and/or its subsidiaries support groups all over the country.  It’s something that all large corporations do.  Through Gordon Singletary, a founder of the CFGBA, S&W concrete recently donated a pervious driveway to Cape Fear River Watch.  Though this project was in the works before Titan bought S&W, as mentioned in the statement from Roanoke Cement, the concrete for that pervious driveway came from Titan.  This constitutes a much larger contribution than the $125 we are currently holding.  Does this ruin the CFRW’s credibility as some have suggested would be the case for the CFGBA if we deposit a check for $125? 

The fact is that we learn from each other and we affect change by communicating.  In the statement from Roanoke Cement, they make some of the points listed above and include the fact that they run biodiesel in their trucks as a result of one of these affiliations.  Had the local biodiesel organization not communicated with Roanoke Cement, it is likely that they would still be running petro diesel in their trucks today.

Organizations like the CFGBA have to have a policy regarding membership and sponsorship.  If we give this check back to Roanoke Cement and deny their membership application, we will set a precedent that we will only take money from members/sponsors that meet some level of green that we set.  The questions then become:

1. What are the environmental standards members sponsors need to meet?

2. How are future members/sponsors researched to determine if they meet the standards?

3. How is qualification managed in a fair & balanced way over the coming months and years?

Here is an interesting example of how this might work.  Many of us have avoided giving our money to the Exxon Corp. for years because of the Valdeze oil spill in Prince William Sound (an entirely preventable "accident") not just because of the damage that was caused, but because they have fought the court decision that ordered them to pay compensation.  To this date the battle still rages and they have not paid for the effects of their incompetence!

In this case Exxon clearly would not make the grade right?  Here is where it gets interesting; there is one retail gas station in town which has chosen to step up & offer biodiesel at the pump in the Wilmington area.  It’s Ted’s Exxon, on Market St.  So would we accept their membership because they are supporting the environment through their biodiesel program, or not because of their affiliation with Exxon?

The fact is that non-profit corporations do not qualify their members or sponsors.  We do not know of a single green building organization in the country that does so.  In fact, every year we asses whether we should become affiliated with the USGBC.  At such time that the CFGBA might choose to become a USGBC affiliate, Titan will be a member by default because they have been a member of the USGBC since 2007.

While the CFGBA has not made a statement, I (2007/2008 CFGBA chair Skye Dunning) responded to an email in May of 2008 which follows:

I would be interested to hear about options.  So this plant is going to be a horrible blight on the community that shouldn't be allowed.  Is there a way it could be built so that it wouldn't be a horrible blight?  If not, is our plan just to stop it here and let them go build the horrible blight in someone else's neighborhood? 

We all use cement which means we are part of the problem.  We can't act like we're outside looking in.  It seems like a more productive path would be to offer a solution.  They should either do it in a way that works environmentally, build it far away from where anyone lives (and downwind from everyone), or they should not build it and we should build without using cement.

I received a response which had a couple of good points including the idea that our primary responsibility is to our families & neighbors, and that, if enough communities react the way we have it will result in action either from government or the corporations themselves, but the third point was that, as citizen’s, it’s not our responsibility and that’s where we disagree. 

Isn’t it our responsibility?  If it’s not our responsibility, who’s is it?  Titan isn’t going to do it.  They are a corporation with the goal is to increase shareholders profits.  That’s what corporations do.  Aren’t we the ones that feel like the other human beings on this planet, indeed our pets, the wild animals, and even the plants are our brothers & sisters?  Aren’t we the ones that call the Earth our Mother?  Don’t we buy free trade goods to help our brothers & sisters in different parts of the world?  Aren’t we the ones that claim that we do know a better way?  Isn’t that why we meet here every month?  Being a critic is the easiest job in the world.  With all of the time, energy, & money we spend on websites & meetings, & protests, can’t we spend some time on alternatives that might result in a better process instead of just moving the current problem to somewhere else?  Let’s give Titan something to work with.  Something that would give them an idea of what we would deem acceptable.  Let’s put the ball in Titan’s court.