David Cash.
What work do you do? How does it relate to the environment?
I’m the director of air policy for the state of Massachusetts in the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. EOEA is an umbrella agency that oversees and coordinates the activities of numerous other environment-related agencies such as the Department of Environmental Protection (the state analog of federal EPA), Coastal Zone Management, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, and the Department of Agricultural Resources.
My work ranges from figuring out how to regulate emissions from power plants to helping with statewide transportation planning to coordinating the development of state guidance on the siting of wind turbines, etc.
What long and winding road led you to your current position?
After college I worked at a sheep ranch/tree farm in eastern Oregon. Organic, holistic management, and deer hunting to fill the freezer for the winter. Gorgeous sunsets. As much as I loved sheep, I am vegetarian …
I wanted to teach, so I went back to school and got a science teaching degree. I taught high-school and middle-school science for four years (in Oregon and Massachusetts), and the curriculum I developed always had a strong science-society-values component. I decided I wanted to “do” environmental policy (whatever that meant) and went back to school at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard to get a Ph.D. in public policy focusing on the role of science in policy making.
Listening to Mark Twain’s advice about never letting my schooling get in the way of my education, I did a lot of activities during the seven years it took me to finish my dissertation that were not directly related to my research (advising government agencies on science and policy, working on international assessments, etc.). I had two kids during those seven years also.
When I finished my thesis, I stayed at the Kennedy School and continued to do research, and I developed an undergraduate course in Environmental Science and Public Policy (unlike in middle school, I never had to send anyone to the principal’s office). After three years, the time was ripe to move on, and I explored a number of different opportunities. I never really envisioned that I would stay in academia, and I wanted to do something more applied. When the director of air policy position opened in September 2004, I jumped at it.
How many emails are currently in your inbox?
144. I probably won’t be able to reduce this number to a manageable 20 until early next week.
Who’s the biggest pain in the ass you have to deal with? Who’s nicer than you would expect?
I was very worried when I took a job for the state about the stereotypes of state workers (inefficient, slackers), but none were true. I’ve been very impressed with the dedication and high-quality work of my coworkers. Naturally there are those inside and outside of state government who have widely divergent views on what makes good environmental policy, but that’s part of what we’re doing — I see part of my role as trying to figure out good policy in the context of controversy and seemingly mutually exclusive interests.
Where were you born? Where do you live now?
I was born in New York City, raised in the Westchester suburbs, and I am settled now in Newton, Mass. (outside of Boston).
What has been the worst moment in your professional life to date?
One of my first jobs was to facilitate a public meeting on long-held transit plans that the state was thinking about changing. For four hours, speaker after speaker (100-plus) rose to the microphone to berate us for abandoning our commitments, for killing kids in an urban area because of the air-quality benefits we were forgoing, and for abusing the trust that had been given to us. The meeting went fine, but I was left with a feeling of failing the public I’ve promised to serve.
What environmental offense has infuriated you the most?
I’m not sure this is an environmental offense, but I’m finding it very frustrating to deal with local environmental groups who are providing all kinds of roadblocks to the development of wind energy. There seems to be an inability to make a connection between desiring a halt to climate change and local air pollution and what that actually might entail in terms of giving up some other environmental things of value. One environmental group (national with local and regional chapters) recently came out with a strongly worded climate action plan but has only opposed proposed wind projects.
What’s your environmental vice?
I fly in airplanes to go to pretty places.
What are you reading these days?
I’m in a book club, and we rotate between fiction and nonfiction. A recent book we read that I highly recommend for insight into power, governance, and public trust is The Power Broker, about Robert Moses and how he completely reshaped the landscape of metropolitan New York from 1930 through the 1960s — a cautionary tale. For fiction, I just finished The Kite Runner, about Afghanistan, moral choices, and family/social ties — also highly recommended.
What’s your favorite place or ecosystem?
The desert Southwest — the place I had most of my early wilderness experiences. Though after being in the arid West for a long time, smelling rotting leaves in the Northeastern forests is very grounding.
What’s one thing the environmental movement is doing particularly well?
In some areas, beginning to make the connection between environmental protection and economic development — truly seeking sustainable development.
What’s one thing the environmental movement is doing badly, and how could it be done better?
It’s too solipsistic — an awful word I learned in a literature class in college that I recall meaning “too self-absorbed” and I see in the dictionary as “the theory that the self can be aware of nothing but its own experiences and states.” It fits well with current environmentalism. Self-reflection is good, but enough already! Let’s put our energy into making real change happen!
If you could institute by fiat one environmental reform, what would it be?
Reform electoral financing.
What was your favorite band when you were 18? How about now?
The Beatles. The Beatles.
What’s your favorite TV show? Movie?
I only watch one TV show: The West Wing. Favorite movie: The Gary Sinise 1992 remake of Of Mice and Men. My wife had to drive home while I wept uncontrollably after seeing it.
What are you happy about right now?
The balance in my life: I have a family, wife, and two daughters that are an utter and complete delight of spark and intensity; I have a great job that I look forward to going to (there have even been some Fridays when I left work thinking, “I’m psyched for Monday”), in which I can exercise creativity, play to my strengths, and develop new skills. I work hard at not letting one of these overpower the other.
If you could have every InterActivist reader do one thing, what would it be?
As I noted in my comments above, too much time is being spent introspectively analyzing the environmental movement and its supposed death. Stop reading the premature postmortems (including in places like Grist) and devote your energies to working in communities, with the public sector, with the private sector, with the firms that we have historically battled against. Build bridges, leverage relationships, find out what the real interests of your “adversaries” are, and see how they overlap with your interests.
David Cash,
Massachusetts
air-policy director.
What can be done to better educate environmentalists and the public at large that windmills are beautiful? — Ken Kukovich, Arlington, Va.
For some people, windmills will never be beautiful. For others, their beauty is inexorably linked to the environmental benefits they provide. But for the vast majority of people, they are an unknown, and the more we can get projects in the ground, the greater opportunity there will be to educate. Also, the more we can link windmills to local benefits, the more beautiful they will be. It’s funny how a municipal windmill in Hull, Mass., is a lot more beautiful to local taxpayers who save on their tax bills than to their neighbors in the next town who receive no tax benefits.
You mentioned your frustration with the groups that are providing roadblocks to wind energy. Do you think it is ever OK to limit wind-power installations for aesthetic reasons? If so, how and where do you draw the line? — Kristin Deason, Arlington, Va.
Sure. Aesthetics is one of many valid criteria that need to be taken into account when deciding on wind-turbine sites. I wouldn’t want to see windmills lining the rim of the Grand Canyon, for example. Siting wind projects will always involve trade-offs between the benefits of clean, renewable energy and aesthetic, wildlife, and other ecological values. What many states and local communities are facing is trying to figure out how to make that calculus. The technology is still new enough that there aren’t a lot of models out there on how to do it right. We are in the process of developing state guidance to help communities, developers, and other interests in identifying the critical criteria to address and how trade-offs can be made.
Photo: Tjaden Farms c/o NREL.
Where in Massachusetts should the first 100 land-based wind turbines be erected? — Lloyd Crawford, Charlemont, Mass.
I don’t know, and I don’t think it’s the place of state government to make that decision. It is the role of state government, though, to provide clear guidance and clear regulations and rules that will help developers and communities make those choices. At the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, we are in the midst of coordinating an interagency effort to develop that kind of guidance, and we’ve just finished a series of regional working groups of interested stakeholders to get input.
What do you feel is currently the biggest challenge to improving your state’s air quality? — Kristin Deason, Arlington, Va.
Addressing transportation-related pollution poses the biggest challenge. First, systemic changes are required in transportation planning and institutions such as the federal Department of Transportation and state transportation agencies that have not historically prioritized air quality or smart growth as central goals. It is rare that transportation agencies work closely with environmental, housing, or economic-development agencies, though the idea of the importance of this integration is taking hold. Massachusetts just completed a draft transportation plan that takes a large step in this direction, partly because Gov. Mitt Romney has created a supra-agency (the Office of Commonwealth Development) that coordinates activities in the environment, housing, transportation, and energy agencies.
Second, major cultural and social shifts (never easy) are required to move people away from the automobile-centered lifestyle that characterizes our culture. Vehicle miles traveled are increasing, and people are choosing larger and less efficient cars — a bad combination from an air-quality perspective. We have a few tools to address this directly (e.g., emissions requirements and the possibility of providing economic incentives for consumers to buy cleaner cars) and indirectly (e.g., creating smart growth policies and good public transit), but our personal desires for the flexible mobility of car ownership come at a collective cost.
What brought you to state government as opposed to national government, and what do you see as the pros and cons of working at each level? — Heather Leslie, Princeton, N.J.
I would have been interested in a federal position, and I explored opportunities at EPA’s regional office. (At this stage in my life, I wanted to stay in the Boston area; it’s where I am surrounded by lots of family — a high priority for my wife and me, especially with two young kids.) In terms of pros and cons, at this point, a lot of creative policy making and innovation is happening at the state level, so it’s an exciting place to be. Also, I had spent the previous 10 years researching and applying my work at the international and national levels. I was ready to do work that addressed issues of sustainability closer to home.
In light of research on heightened risks of respiratory disease for children living near high-traffic areas, are you advocating any public policy to either reduce traffic loads affecting such neighborhoods or provide relocation assistance for families and individuals who would rather not be exposed to this kind of elevated health risk? — Jeff Schimpff, Madison, Wis.
Yes, this is a high-priority issue that we are addressing through a variety of channels. We are expanding public transit (and in general, following smart-growth principles) in these communities that will reduce the car traffic on major arteries that pass through the region. We are replacing high-emitting, old diesel buses (one of the worst sources of the particulate pollution that results in the respiratory problems you mention) with alternative-fuel buses (compressed natural gas) or new, cleaner diesel buses. We are also beginning programs that help communities retrofit school buses and municipal fleets with technologies that reduce emissions. And finally, low emissions standards are being implemented for all cars. I have never heard of any relocation assistance programs to address this problem.
What do you think is the most important factor in getting people involved in the environmental movement at the community level? What needs to change about the movement now in order to get more people to become a part of local-level politics? — Riley Neugebauer, Roxbury, Mass.
I think the movement needs to more actively engage at different levels. I don’t see how you can succeed at local-level politics without engaging the state or other levels. People in local communities are faced with constraints or opportunities that come from other levels, and if those aren’t acknowledged and addressed, it’s going to be difficult to move forward. Find the levers of change and be very strategic about devoting resources to pushing those levers. Are those levers in the local city council, the regional planning board, the metropolitan planning organization, on a specific committee of the state legislature, in a state agency, through legal channels, at the federal level? If a local environmental movement does not do its homework and plan strategically, it risks expending a lot of energy with little result — a sure way to keep others from seeing the benefit of being involved.
