tagged w/ EPA
-
This is a public service announcement. Your government has lied to you. The safety regulators have lied to you. The media has lied to you. You and your children are currently breathing Strontium, Cesium, Xenon, and radioactive Iodine, which is still spewing from the “active” Fukushima-Daiichi reactor complex. The irrefutable evidence I present needs to be front page news everywhere. Inform everyone.
http://rezn8d.net/2012/04/12/fukushima-radiation-incoming-taste-the-rainbow/This is a public service announcement. Your government has lied to you. The safety... more
-
-
R3zn8D
-
added this
-
1 month ago
- |
-
Mounting troubles at Japan’s hobbled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant now pose a real threat to human survival. If the area in which Unit 4 is struck by another 7.0 magnitude earthquake, there’s a 70 percent chance that “the entire fuel pool structure will collapse” and massive doses of lethal nuclear radiation will be released into the atmosphere. The disaster would release approximately “134 million curies is Cesium-137 — roughly 85 times the amount of Cs-137 released at Chernobyl as estimated by the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP).” Experts believe that the amounts are sufficient to “destroy the world environment and our civilization”, which makes containment “an issue of human survival.” (“The Greatest Single Threat to Humanity: Fuel Pool Number 4“, Washington’s blog)
The structural integrity of Unit 4′s cooling pool was greatly compromised by the earthquake and following tsunami which struck the facility over a year ago. At present, the pools are not adequately protected or reinforced, which means that a sizable tremor could “cause a disaster worse than the three reactor meltdowns.” If such a disaster were to occur, “people should get out of Japan, and residents of the West Coast of America and Canada should shut all of their windows and stay inside,” says nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen.
While the danger to life and the environment pose the greatest single national security threat the United States has faced since WW2, the Obama administration has provided little aid to the emergency effort. Japan is largely “going it alone” trying to cobble together a plan to safely store the spent fuel and minimize the risks to public safety.
On March 8, 2012, Dr. Hiroaki Koide, Research Associate at the Research Reactor Institute of Kyoto University, gave his bleak assessment of the situation on the Japanese a news program called, “Morning Bird”. Koide explained how 1,500 rods are presently located in a “fuel pool” that has been severely damaged. The rods have to be cooled constantly or a “huge amount of radiation contained in the spent fuel will be released outside”. If an earthquake hits and undermines the pool, the coolant will exit the pool, the rods will melt and radioactive plumes will rise into the atmosphere. Koide explained that the rods could not be safely removed from the existing pool because “if you hoist them up in the air, huge amount of radiation will come out from the spent fuel and people nearby will die.”
One of the journalists on “Morning Bird” asked Koide what would happen if the Unit was struck by another earthquake?
Koide answered, “That will be the end.”
“The end,” the journalist asked, visibly shaken?
“The end,” Koide repeated emphatically.
(“Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 4: An earthquake before spent fuel rods are moved to safe storage would be “the end”, Lambert Strether, Naked Capitalism)
Now, check this out:
“Japan’s former Ambassador to Switzerland, Mr. Mitsuhei Murata… strongly stated that if the crippled building of reactor unit 4—with 1,535 fuel rods in the spent fuel pool 100 feet (30 meters) above the ground—collapses, not only will it cause a shutdown of all six reactors but it will also affect the common spent fuel pool containing 6,375 fuel rods, located some 50 meters from reactor 4. In both cases the radioactive rods are not protected by a containment vessel; dangerously, they are open to the air. This would certainly cause a global catastrophe like we have never before experienced. … Such a catastrophe would affect us all for centuries.”
(“Fukushima Daiichi Site: Cesium-137 is 85 times greater than at Chernobyl Accident”, akiomatsumura.com)
Murata’s concerns have been brought to the attention of the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, to high-ranking officials in the Obama administration and EU, and to leaders around the world. The reaction has basically been the same everywhere, which is, “It’s Japan’s problem. Let them deal with it.”
There is no way to overstate the media’s complicity in concealing critical information about the tragedy that is presently unfolding at Fukushima. If there is another earthquake, the media will certainly be every bit as responsible as the government officials who saw the danger, but chose to do nothing.
Now you may be asking yourself, why is RTV covering this and not Fox, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, or any other bullshit corporate owned propaganda machine?
A SHORT HISTORY OF US GOVERNMENT RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE
PUBLIC LAW 95-79 [P.L. 95-79]
TITLE 50, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 1520
“CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM”
“The use of human subjects will be allowed for the testing of chemical and biological agents by the U.S. Department of Defense, accounting to Congressional committees with respect to the experiments and studies.”
“The Secretary of Defense [may] conduct tests and experiments involving the use of chemical and biological [warfare] agents on civilian populations [within the United States].”
-SOURCE-
Public Law 95-79, Title VIII, Sec. 808, July 30, 1977, 91 Stat. 334. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 91, page 334, you will find Public Law 95-79. Public Law 97-375, title II, Sec. 203(a)(1), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1882. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 96, page 1882, you will find Public Law 97-375.
DOES OUR GOVERNMENT RESPECT HUMAN LIFE?
The following list comes from declassified documents, news reports, videos, the National Archives, and from the final report of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments.
Continue reading!
http://rezn8d.net/2012/04/20/fukushima-is-about-to-blow-and-nobody-gives-a-damn-about-you/
Video references in commentsMounting troubles at Japan’s hobbled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant now... more
-
-
R3zn8D
-
added this
-
1 month ago
- |
-
Fiberglass is highly common in not only homes and schools, but it can also be found in consumer items like toothpaste and certain medications. Beyond that, it could occupy the air you breathe. And thanks to one report that asserts the safety of the substance — which a leading organization is now calling fraudulent and outright wrong — fiberglass is still being used on a major scale.
Fiberglass was nominated as a leading safety issue on the synthetic mineral fiber list for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) back in 1994. It was even documented as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen” by the National Institutes of Health in its 2011 “Report on Carcinogens.”
So why is it still so prominent in your daily life? One final report by the NIH dismissed all of the previous findings and concerns, saying that there was “no evidence of carcinogenicity” surrounding fiberglass.
A curious result, as the previous evidence had already suggested a link between fiberglass and cancer – a result that the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), a major organization in the fight for toxin-free air, says is based on faulty information. The group asserts that the formula the EPA and NIH examined to determine whether or not fiberglass poses a cancer risk was seriously diluted, making fiberglass appear to be safe. The result is the OSHA listing fiberglass as ‘safe’ for workers, and allowing them heavy exposure on a daily basis.According to the agency in their report:
In assessing the cancer risks related to the source category, EPA used long-term concentrations affecting the most highly exposed census block for each facility. This analysis dilutes the effect of sources’ emissions by estimating the impact at the centroid of the census block instead of at the property line or wherever the maximum exposed individual is.
The information is particularly concerning for workers who may be handling fiberglass products on a daily basis, and are unaware of the associated risks.
With the call by the NACAA to government agencies to re-examine the skewed results regarding cancer-linked fiberglass, some serious changes may soon come about that the OSHA is forced to pick up on.
http://www.freedominfonetwork.org/profiles/blogs/major-group-says-government-diluted-fiberglass-cancer-resultsFiberglass is highly common in not only homes and schools, but it can also be found in... more
-
-
A spate of earthquakes across the middle of the U.S. is “almost certainly” man-made, and may be caused by wastewater from oil or gas drilling injected into the ground, U.S. government scientists said in a study.
Researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey said that for the three decades until 2000, seismic events in the nation’s midsection averaged 21 a year. They jumped to 50 in 2009, 87 in 2010 and 134 in 2011.A spate of earthquakes across the middle of the U.S. is “almost certainly”... more
-
-
Why is North Carolina not yet a site for drilling rigs, mud and service companies? Why is there shale gas exploration and production in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and on different rock formations in Arkansas, Texas and in the Rocky Mountains?
The answer is political.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/03/21/1947986/potential-bounty-for-north-carolina.html#storylink=cpyWhy is North Carolina not yet a site for drilling rigs, mud and service companies? Why... more
-
-
Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." Fine offered these comments during a Feb. 27, 2012, presentation to the John Locke Foundation's Shafesbury Society. Video courtesy of CarolinaJournal.tv. Watch full-length video of JLF events here: http://www.johnlocke.org/events/videos.html
Dr. Daniel I. Fine works with the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy. He is a longtime research associate at the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute, MIT. Fine is also a policy adviser on nonconventional oil and gas. He is co-editor of Resource War in 3-D: Dependence, Diplomacy and Defense, and has contributed to Business Week, the Engineering and Mining Journal and the Washington Times. Fine has testified on strategic natural resources before the U.S. Senate committees on Foreign Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources. In this speech, he discusses "Shale Gas Wars: From Pennsylvania to North Carolina."
http://youtu.be/4Lbn9diK1PADr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North... more
-
-
After natural gas drilling began near their rural homes about 30 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, Carol Moten and her neighbors noticed that their well water began to smell. Then came the headaches, skin lesions, and diarrhea, in household after household. A two-year-old dog fell over dead.
“We’re talking about little children that have nosebleeds, cats that fall off windowsills,” she said.
Three years ago, Moten and her neighbor, Donald Allison, visited Dr. Amelia Pare in nearby McMurray for their skin infections. Allison’s health continued to deteriorate and earlier this month he died from what the neighborhood understood to be bone cancer. He was 46. Since there was no autopsy, Pare said, the exact cause of Allison’s death is unclear. “Does anybody really know?” she said. “There’s no funding for this.”
Some experts are concerned that the chemical make-up of the witches brew used to force gas from rock is at the heart of these health problems. When a few members of Congress tried to amend the Safe Water Drinking Act to remove a special exemption for hydraulic fracturing and require that drillers disclose to state regulators the chemicals being used, the industry objected. The actual content of these chemical mixes is a closely guarded secret. Exxon’s top official, Rex Tillerson, said that his company would not go through with its $41 billion dollar purchase of gas giant XTO if Congress made hydraulic fracturing “commercially impracticable.” DCBureau reported in 2010 that nanotechnology is being used in a new generation of drilling fluids.
Reports of drilling-related chemical spills that cover an acre or more fuel suspicion that drilling operations are triggering the outbreak of symptoms in heavily drilled Washington County, Pennsylvania. But as Pare acknowledged, there is no proof – no smoking gun –that a specific drilling practice or byproduct makes animals and people sick.
Industry vigorously challenges any assertion that a link exists – in Pennsylvania or anywhere else – and scientific study of the question is still in its infancy. Experts in government tread cautiously in describing the potential threat, and regulatory efforts lack focus.
In January, a senior official at the National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta declined to say for certain that gas drilling poses a threat to public health, but he added that “site-by-site work is turning up data of concern.”
Christopher Portier, head of CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, said in an email to The Associated Press that future studies should explore “all the ways people can be exposed, such as through air, water, soil, plants and animals.”
“In addition to groundwater,” Portier said, “exposure pathways could include the air at well sites, impoundment sites, and compressor stations… livestock … and recreational fish.”
In the face of official calls for “future studies” of how high-volume hydro fracking might affect human health, states like Pennsylvania and New York have avoided these issues.
In Pennsylvania, Gov. Tom Corbett and the Republican political establishment have eagerly embraced fracking, touting its economic benefits and downplaying its possible health consequences. Corbett’s 52-member advisory panel on Marcellus Shale drilling has no members with health expertise, according to a recent analysis by professors at the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Public Health. (Neither do advisory panels on gas drilling for the state of Maryland and for the U.S. Secretary of Energy.)
New York State, which is poised to allow high-volume hydro fracking of shale formations as soon as it completes its final rules, has rejected repeated calls for a thorough study of the health implications of fracking.
In 2009, a regional official at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency urged the New York Department of Health to take a major role with the Department of Environmental Conservation in preparing the fracking rules. That did not happen. In 2011, dozens of physicians and health care professionals signed a letter to Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, urging him to order a comprehensive health impact assessment of fracking. If the state DOH would not perform one, the health professionals said, the governor should assign the task to a graduate school of public health.
But Cuomo took no action. The draft drilling rules, which run more than 1,000 pages, still do not have a section devoted to drilling’s potential effects on human health.
The Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York has repeatedly argued that the state has – if anything – erred on the side of too much study. The rule-making process is in its third year, and drillers have long criticized the DEC for delays in issuing permits to use high-volume fracking on horizontal wells.
That process involves drilling vertically down into a shale formation and then angling the drill horizontally along the shale stratum. Drillers then force roughly 5 million gallons of water, along with sand and proprietary chemicals, into each well to crack the shale and free gas. Much of the fracking fluid returns to the surface mixed with subsurface brine, which tends to be laced with heavy metals and radioactive materials. In Pennsylvania, this flowback mixture often sits in open pits, which are prone to leaking into fields and streams.
While the industry has used less invasive forms of fracking for decades, the efficiency of high-volume fracking has led to an explosion of gas drilling activity across the country.
That growth trend could be threatened by evidence that fracking endangers human health, and drillers have aggressively challenged hints of a link.
That is what happened after the EPA issued a draft report on December 8, 2011, that concluded that groundwater in Pavillion, Wyoming, had been contaminated by chemicals associated with fracking. In a press release, Encana, a driller in Pavillion, called the EPA’s findings “irresponsible.” The same day an official of Chesapeake Energy, another leading driller, sent an email to employees that accused the EPA of being “more interested in their PR strategy and in establishing a connection between hydraulic fracturing and water contamination than finding the truth.”
On Dec. 18 – less than three months after Chesapeake Energy had contributed $250,000 to a super PAC backing his then-active presidential bid – Texas Gov. Rick Perry declared that there had never been a proven case of fracking causing groundwater contamination.
In fact, even when circumstantial evidence is strong, it is extraordinarily difficult to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a gas drilling operation caused a contamination.
In April 2009, 17 cows foamed at the mouth and fell dead within an hour after they allegedly lapped up frackingflowback that had leaked into a Louisiana field from a nearby natural gas well that had recently been fracked.
More at the linkAfter natural gas drilling began near their rural homes about 30 miles southwest of... more
-
-
Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." Fine offered these comments during a Feb. 27, 2012, presentation to the John Locke Foundation's Shafesbury Society. Video courtesy of CarolinaJournal.tv. Watch full-length video of JLF events here: http://www.johnlocke.org/events/videos.htmlDr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North... more
-
-
Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." Fine offered these comments during a Feb. 27, 2012, presentation to the John Locke Foundation's Shafesbury Society. Video courtesy of CarolinaJournal.tv. Watch full-length video of JLF events here:
Daniel Fine discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing (two minutes)---
http://youtu.be/4Lbn9diK1PA
The full one hour video can be seen here-->"North Carolina?s approach to natural gas fracking" ---> http://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2012/02/27/no...
Dr. Daniel I. Fine works with the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy. He is a longtime research associate at the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute, MIT. Fine is also a policy adviser on nonconventional oil and gas. He is co-editor of Resource War in 3-D: Dependence, Diplomacy and Defense, and has contributed to Business Week, the Engineering and Mining Journal and the Washington Times. Fine has testified on strategic natural resources before the U.S. Senate committees on Foreign Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources. In this speech, he discusses "Shale Gas Wars: From Pennsylvania to North Carolina."Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North... more
-
-
Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." Fine offered these comments during a Feb. 27, 2012, presentation to the John Locke Foundation's Shafesbury Society. Video courtesy of CarolinaJournal.tv. Watch full-length video of JLF events here:
Daniel Fine discusses North Carolina's approach to shale gas and hydraulic fracturing (two minutes)---
http://youtu.be/4Lbn9diK1PA
The full one hour video can be seen here-->"North Carolina?s approach to natural gas fracking" ---> http://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2012/02/27/no...
Dr. Daniel I. Fine works with the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy. He is a longtime research associate at the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute, MIT. Fine is also a policy adviser on nonconventional oil and gas. He is co-editor of Resource War in 3-D: Dependence, Diplomacy and Defense, and has contributed to Business Week, the Engineering and Mining Journal and the Washington Times. Fine has testified on strategic natural resources before the U.S. Senate committees on Foreign Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources. In this speech, he discusses "Shale Gas Wars: From Pennsylvania to North Carolina."Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North... more
-
-
The White House is withholding documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by an environmental group that suspects the Obama administration of working with Monsanto-linked lobbyists to defend the planting of genetically engineered (GE) crops in wildlife refuges across the country.
The information currently being withheld includes a portion of a January 2011 email that a top White House policy analyst received from a lobbyist with the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), which represents GE seed companies such as Monsanto and Syngenta.
According to legal filings, the White House withheld the portion of the email because it accidentally contained information on BIO's lobbying strategy that, if released, would cause competitive harm to the group and the companies it represents.
"We suspect the reason an industry lobbyist so cavalierly shared strategy is that the White House is part of that strategy," stated Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) staff counsel Kathryn Douglass, who is arguing the email should be a public record. "The White House's legal posture is as credible as claiming Coca Cola's secret formula was 'inadvertently' left in a duffel bag at the bus station."
Last July, PEER released a number of internal emails revealing that Peter Schmeissner, a senior science policy analyst and member of the White House's biotechnology working group, had corresponded with the BIO lobbyist about a legal challenge filed by PEER and its allies.
The PEER lawsuit had successfully halted GE crop plantings in wildlife refuges in northeastern states, and the group continues to challenge planned plantings in other regions across the country.
In the emails obtained by PEER, longtime biotech lobbyist Adrianne Massey asks Schmeissner if the "interagency working group" is addressing the PEER's legal challenges. Massey also forwarded environmental assessments of proposed GE crop plots at wildlife refuges in other regions of the country. These assessments could protect future GE crop plots in refuges from legal challenges.
The emails prompted PEER to request further information under FOIA on the interagency group, known as the White House Agricultural Biotechnology Working Group. According to PEER, the quiet and informal group includes top-level officials from almost every agency under the Obama administration involved in agriculture and trade, including the State Department, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency.
PEER is currently suing the White House for information withheld from the FOIA request, including the Massey email and the working group's schedule, agenda items and work related to GE crops.
An affidavit filed by a BIO attorney claims the portion of the Massey email withheld from PEER contains industry trade secrets that were "mistakenly" forwarded to Schmeissner and, if released, would cause competitive harm to companies BIO represents:
"BIO operates in an advocacy environment in which there are many organizations that oppose the use of biotechnology, particularly in the agricultural arena, and that seek to persuade federal, state and local agencies to restrict the technology's use. If this information were released, competitors could imitate or seek to counteract BIO's strategy and further their own contrary agendas at the expense of BIO and its members."
In its own legal filings, the White House claims it rightfully withheld information under existing disclosure law.
PEER Director Jeff Ruch told Truthout that he suspects the Massey email details a effort by BIO lobbyists to have the White House ensure that environmental assessments of GE crops on wildlife refuges are strong enough to protect the projects from further legal challenges. Challenging these legally mandated assessments is a tactic often used by environmental groups like PEER to tie up controversial projects in court.
GE Crops in Refuges
Deborah Rocque, a US Fish and Wildlife official overseeing the wildlife refuge system, told Truthout in 2011 that the agency has allowed farming on refuges for years as part of habitat restoration efforts. Rocque said planting herbicide-resistant GE crops would allow conservationists to establish ground cover while killing unwanted weeds with herbicides.
PEER, however, claims the Obama administration is supporting the GE plots in wildlife refuges as part of an effort to boost exports. Several US trade partners, especially in Europe, are skeptical about GE crops, and some countries have banned certain GE seeds and exports. PEER contends that the White House working group's involvement indicates high-level interest in showing trade partners that the US government considers GE crops to be so environmentally safe that Americans plant them in wildlife reserves.
The US has also has put heavy diplomatic pressure in recent years on countries such as France and Spain to accept exports and GE crop technology, as revealed by WikiLeaks and several Truthout reports.
PEER filed its first legal challenge after being contacted by Fish and Wildlife biologists who opposed growing GE crops in wildlife refuges. PEER later obtained an internal email among Fish and Wildlife officials that the group believes is evidence that USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has put pressure on Fish and Wildlife to support GE agriculture.
More at the linkThe White House is withholding documents requested under the Freedom of Information... more
-
-
BISMARCK, N.D. — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul praised hemp as an alternative crop and said a free-market approach would protect the nation’s environment Monday during North Dakota campaign stops that drew hundreds of cheering supporters.
North Dakota, which is holding Republican presidential caucuses March 6, is one of 13 states with a caucus or primary from Feb. 28 to March 6. North Dakota has 28 delegates to the Republican National Convention in August, although the caucus results will not dictate how any of them vote.
Paul campaigned in Williston, Dickinson, Jamestown and Bismarck on Sunday and Monday, following rival Rick Santorum’s swing through Fargo, on the Minnesota border, and the northwestern oil-country town of Tioga last week.
In Jamestown, about 100 miles east of Bismarck, Paul was critical of the federal government’s ban on the cultivation of industrial hemp, a crop that is related to marijuana but does not have its mind-affecting properties.
Industrial hemp is grown in neighboring Canada and other countries, where it is used to make paper, lotions, clothing and biofuels.
North Dakota’s Legislature and Agriculture Department have pushed allowing hemp to be grown in the state. A state lawmaker who wanted to cultivate the crop filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against the Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking a declaration that doing so would be legal.
“There is no reason, in a free society, that farmers shouldn’t be allowed to raise hemp,” Paul said during a Jamestown appearance that drew about 300 people. “Hemp is a good product.”
In Bismarck, where the Republican congressman spoke to about 1,200 people Monday night in the gymnasium of a private Christian school, Paul said enforcement of private property rights would be sufficient to protect citizens against pollution, rather than relying on the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
“The more socialized a system is, the worse the property is, and the worse the environment is,” Paul said. “We should never be bashful about saying we believe in property rights ... and we don’t have to give one inch and say that we’re careless with the environment, because you don’t have a right to pollute your neighbor’s property.”
In North Dakota’s Republican presidential caucuses in 2008, Paul finished third behind Mitt Romney and John McCain, getting 21 percent of the almost 9,800 votes case.
Duane Sattler, of Richardton, was one of the sign-carrying Paul supporters who attended his Bismarck speech. His son, 13-year-old Shawn Sattler, sat nearby, waving an American flag.
“He’s been standing alone a lot of times,” Sattler said of Paul. “He votes for our personal freedoms, for sound money, and for less government and less taxes.”
He became a Paul supporter during his presidential run in 2008, Sattler said. “I really went and did some research, and the deeper I dug, the more I liked the man,” he said. “With the other candidates, the deeper I dug, the less I liked them.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/environment/gop-presidential-candidate-ron-paul-talks-hemp-environmental-regulation-in-north-dakota-visit/2012/02/20/gIQANA3FQR_story.htmlBISMARCK, N.D. — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul praised hemp as an... more
-
-
American veterans and the entire country of Viet Nam affected by Agent Orange have been shafted beyond imagination due to corruption within the US government and US courts. US courts have protected Monsanto and Dow Chemical from liability and criminal prosecution. The US government has shielded Monsanto and Dow from the massive cost of medical treatment for victims and environmental remediation cleanup costs that would drive these corporations into bankruptcy.
Before we delve further into the issue, it’s important to detail what exactly dioxin is. Dioxin has a half life of 100 years or more when it is below the surface, leached into soil or embedded in river or stream sediment. Dioxin was generated as a byproduct of herbicide 2,4,5-T made by Monsanto and Dow, the top 2 producers of Agent Orange. It causes cancer, birth defects, liver damage and other major health problems.
Monsanto & Dow’s 2,4,5-T dioxin laden-herbicide was used in the US for agricultural purposes in the 1940′s before it was used for chemical warfare in Viet Nam from the early 1960′s through 1971. It was phased out in the late 1970′s. Now, let’s discuss the political situation behind this carcinogen.
US Government and US Court Dioxin Cover-Ups
•President Reagans’s administration, in cahoots with the CDC, thwarted a $43 million Congressional Study of Agent Orange in 1987 to protect itself and its corporate pals Monsanto & Dow from accountability to US veterans and the people of Viet Nam.
•US Courts dismissed veterans’ Agent Orange lawsuits based on a Supreme Court precedent, known as the Feres Doctrine, freeing the government of responsibility for deaths and injuries related to military service.
•The Supreme Court refused to hear American and Vietnamese victims’ lawsuits against Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers on 3 separate occasions. Remember that the Supreme Court collects their checks from the federal government.
Atrocious Criminal Acts By Monsanto & Dow
•Agent Orange makers hide behind government contractor immunity, despite the fact that dioxin contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T was produced long before they were contractors for the government (50 million tons of the herbicide was sprayed in the US per year). No modifications were used for Monsanto & Dow’s herbicide — half the ingredients in Agent Orange — so the immunity defense falls flat.
•Boehringer, a German 2,4,5-T herbicide producer notified Dow in 1957 about dioxin hazards and that dioxin could be eliminated by slow cooking the herbicide for about 12 hours. It appears that Dow and Monsanto continued cooking 2,4,5-T quickly in 45 minutes. Higher output led to higher profits. Monsanto’s formula contained high levels of dioxin and was dirtier than Dow’s product.
•Monsanto was not only aware in 1950 that dioxin was a health danger, but they also created a fraudulent health study.
•In 1965 Dow met in secret with other Agent Orange manufacturers to discuss the toxicity hazards of dioxin and their fear over a government investigation and restrictive regulations.
US Veterans Shafted By the Kangaroo Court
Judge Jack Weinstein of the US Federal Court of the Eastern District of New York committed the following offenses in several class action suits filed by veterans against Monsanto & Dow:
•Weinstein appointed attorneys to represent the veterans and then intimidated the attorneys into agreeing to a ‘nuisance’ settlement of $180 million- nowhere near enough money to cover the medical treatment of hundreds of thousands of injured vets.
•Weinstein rejected the veterans’ expert studies, instead of allowing a jury to decide on the credibility of the expert witnesses; Weinstein created a new rule of law from the bench.
•Weinstein based his ruling on Monsanto’s expert study that was later proven to be fraudulent.
• Weinstein dismissed all other veterans’ lawsuits against Monsanto and Dow.
• Weinstein took over a case that was unlawfully transferred to his federal court as it had been filed in the state of Texas. He dismissed that case.
• Astonishingly, Weistein created a second new rule of law to protect Monsanto and Dow. Weinstein invented immunity for government contractors!
Weinstein’s excuse for the government contractor defense was that if contractors were made to pay, they would pass the cost on to the government, so they were therefore immune. Weinstein’s new law was created from the bench instead of law passed through Congress!
Weinsteins’s law has now been extended to all government supply contractors (even non-military contractors) in the courts.
Viet Nam
Approximately 11 million gallons of Agent Orange was dumped on Viet Nam between 1962 to 1970. It is estimated that Agent Orange is responsible for 400,000 deaths, 3 million victims of disease and 500,000 children born with birth defects.
Over 14 million acres of Vietnamese forests were sprayed. Agent Orange was also dumped in water supplies.
In 2004, Vietnamese victims filed a lawsuit against Dow, Monsanto and other manufacturers of Agent Orange. Judge Weinstein (yes, the same Judge Weinstein) presided over this case and dismissed it. Weinstein used the excuse that Monsanto and Dow had government sovereign immunity that extended to them because they were government contractors. He also ruled that Agent Orange was not considered a poison during that period, under international law.
The Supreme Court refused to hear this case, too.
The stated purpose of using Agent Orange was to deny the enemy cover in forested areas through defoliation. However, the US Army did contract studies in 1943 of the effects of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D (the other ingredient of Agent Orange) on cereal grains, including rice, and developed the concept of using aerial herbicide spraying to destroy enemy crops to disrupt the food supply. Obviously, poisoning the enemy, farmland and civilians was a chemical warfare strategy used by the US government.
Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/white-house-us-courts-and-epa-shaft-veterans-to-protect-monsanto/#ixzz1mZIi85a7
http://www.salem-news.com/stimg/february132012/agent_orange_the_last_battle.jpgAmerican veterans and the entire country of Viet Nam affected by Agent Orange have... more
-
-
The Cornwall Alliance calls environmentalism "one of the greatest threats to society."
A conservative religious organization with ties to the oil industry is lashing out at health-conscious evangelical leaders for supporting new federal rules on mercury. They assert that protection of the unborn from toxic pollution cannot be called pro-life because the term does not mean “quality of life.”
The Cornwall Alliance is a group of conservative evangelicals devoted to spreading disinformation about climate change through its mission of “free-market environmental stewardship.” In its Declaration on Global Warming, the organization says “we deny that carbon dioxide … is a pollutant” and that “we deny that alternative, renewable fuels can … replace fossil and nuclear fuels.”
Think Progress conducted a lengthy investigation of this pollution-pushing evangelical group in 2010.
Responding to a new video and radio ad campaign from the Evangelical Environment Network that encourages lawmakers to support new mercury standards in order to “protect the unborn,” the Cornwall Alliance issued a statement explaining its view that being pro-life does not denote “quality of life.”
The term pro-life originated historically in the struggle to end abortion on demand and continues to be used in public discourse overwhelmingly in that sense. To ignore that is at best sloppy communication and at worst intentional deception. The life in pro-life denotes not quality of life but life itself. The term denotes opposition to a procedure that intentionally results in dead babies. (Bold not our emphasis.)
This doesn’t mean we should ignore environmental risks. It does mean they should not be portrayed as pro-life. Genuinely pro-life people will usually desire to reduce other risks as well—guided by cost/benefit analysis. But to call those issues “pro-life” is to obscure the meaning of the term.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the new mercury rules will prevent 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000 asthma attacks each year. And the impact of high levels of mercury in unborn children are well documented:
For fetuses, infants, and children, the primary health effect of methylmercury is impaired neurological development. Impacts on cognitive thinking, memory, attention, language, and fine motor and visual spatial skills have been seen in children exposed to methylmercury in the womb.
Outbreaks of methylmercury poisonings have made it clear that adults, children, and developing fetuses are at risk from ingestion exposure to methylmercury. During these poisoning outbreaks some mothers with no symptoms of nervous system damage gave birth to infants with severe disabilities, it became clear that the developing nervous system of the fetus may be more vulnerable to methylmercury than is the adult nervous system.
A growing number of religious leaders — including the U.S. Conference of Bishops — has come out in favor of reducing mercury emissions because of their impact on the health of children.
“A new national standard to reduce mercury and toxic air pollution from power plants is an important step forward to protect the health of all people, especially unborn babies and young children, from harmful exposure to dangerous air pollutants,” said the U.S. bishops’ domestic policy chairman in response to the proposed rules on mercury emissions.
In stark contrast to mainstream religious leaders, the fringe Cornwall Alliance has called the environmental movement “one of the greatest threats to society and the church today.”
Perhaps they are referring to the leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI? Dubbed the “Green Pope,” Pope Benedict has been a vocal supporter of strong environmental standards, renewable energy, and action on climate change in order to protect “the whole of creation.”
Watch the video ad campaign from the Evangelical Environment Network below:
Update
The Evangelical Environmental Network continues to defend its ads from political attacks against prominent politicians, including Oklahoma Republican Senator Jim Inhofe. “We believe protecting the unborn from mercury poisoning is a consistent pro-life position. An issue that impacts the unborn – that’s where we resonate as a pro-life organization,” said Alexei Laushkin, an EEN spokesman, in an interview with The Hill Thursday.
More at the linkThe Cornwall Alliance calls environmentalism "one of the greatest threats to... more
-
-
With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set to finally enact stricter air pollution standards in accordance with the Clean Air Act and two subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions requiring them to do so, powerful Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are working to make sure that the new standards never see the light of day. The specific measures being targeted are the EPA’s new standards for carbon emissions from power plant smoke stacks.
Fred Upton (R-MI), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along with Republicans Joe Barton (TX) and Ed Whitfield (KY) sent a letter last week to the White House, demanding that the Obama administration take action to stop the EPA from regulating carbon emissions from power plants.
From their letter:
“We are concerned about the regulation’s impact on jobs and the economy, and that it will not comply with all applicable Executive Orders…
“In this rulemaking, EPA may be seeking to do precisely what Congress and the American public rejected in the last Congress. The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation from the 111th Congress would have significantly raised the cost of energy and driven US jobs overseas.
“We ask for your help in supporting policies that will encourage economic growth and job creation rather than additional costly regulations that will raise new barriers to job creation and burden struggling businesses and families.”
The three men certainly know how to include the buzzwords that appeal to American citizens – jobs, economy, raising energy prices – but when put through the truth test, their claims simply don’t hold up. For example, enacting the new standards has the opposite effect on the job market – it would create tens of thousands additional jobs for American workers, not destroy them. The conservative Heritage Foundation has also been beating the drum about regulations raising energy costs, which could actually happen. However, any rate increases would be a corporate decision, not a government decision. The electric energy industry in America currently generates $370.5 billion a year in revenue, with an average revenue of $9.88 per KwH sold. With the national average to produce a kilowatt hour of electricity being around 10 cents, that leaves the company a profit of more than $9 per Kwh of electricity sold, meaning that any rate increases are the result of protecting profits, not because they can’t afford the increase.
So why are these Republicans trying to dismantle the work of the EPA? Simple – they are in the pockets of the dirty energy industry. Fred Upton has received more than $640,000 from electric utilities over his career, and an additional $308,000 from oil and gas. Joe Barton has a combined total of more than $3 million from electric utilities and oil and gas over the course of his career. And Ed Whitfield has gotten more than $600,000 from the two sectors during his tenure in Washington. All of these men have a direct financial stake in the profitability of the dirty energy industry. After all, the more money these companies spend on complying with new standards, the less they have to purchase politicians in Washington.
These latest attacks on the EPA and the environment are not a surprise. In fact, the anti-environmental record of the US Congress over the last year was so awful that Democratic Congressmen Henry Waxman, Edward Markey, and Howard Berman prepared a report last December detailing the numerous ways in which the 112th Congress earned the reputation as the most anti-environmental Congress in history:
“House Republicans have repeatedly voted to undermine basic environmental protections that have existed for decades. They have voted to block actions to prevent air pollution; to strip the Environmental Protection Agency of authority to enforce water pollution standards; to halt efforts to address climate change; to stop the Department of the Interior from identifying lands suitable for wilderness designations; to allow oil and gas development off the coasts of Florida, California, and other states opposed to offshore drilling; and to slash funding for the Department of Energy, including funding to support renewable energy and energy efficiency, by more than 80%.
“The House of Representatives averaged more than one anti-environmental vote for every day the House was in session in 2011. Of the 770 legislative roll call votes taken in the House this year, 22% – more than one out of every five – were votes to undermine environmental protection. During these roll calls, 94% of Republican members voted for the anti-environment position, while 86% of Democratic members voted for the pro-environment position.
“The Environmental Protection Agency was the most popular target of House Republicans. Of the 191 anti-environment votes, 114 targeted EPA; 35 targeted the Department of the Interior; and 31 targeted the Department of Energy.”
And that was just in their first year. Imagine what they can accomplish the next round of elections this coming November.
By Farron Cousins | 6 February 12With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set to finally enact stricter air... more
-
-
Dioxin is the most toxic man-made chemical known regarding damage to health and the environment.
The EPA has withheld a study about dioxin for decades in order to protect large industries that produce dioxin while manufacturing herbicides and pesticides, plastics, chlorine, bleach, and other chemicals. In addition, industrialized agriculture (Big Ag) has pressured the EPA to withhold the report because dioxin becomes concentrated in animal products like meat, eggs and dairy.
The non-cancer portion of the EPA report is due out by the end of January 2012, with the cancer portion to follow at some unspecified date.
Dioxin is an umbrella term for a class of super toxic chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, liver disease, immune system damage and many other health problems. There is no safe ‘threshold’ dose as our bodies have zero defense against dioxin, according to health consultant Jonathan Campbell.
Dioxin has a half-life of over 100 years in the environment when it is below the surface or dumped in waterways.
Prior Dioxin Contamination
Monsanto and Dow Chemical were the largest producers of 2,4,5-T herbicide that created dioxin as a byproduct and was used as an agricultural herbicide before the 1950′s. Monsanto, Dow Chemical and other makers of dioxin-contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T produced 50 MILLION pounds of these chemicals per year for agricultural uses in the US! Since 1947, more than 300 million pounds of dioxin laden 2,4,5-T was sprayed on more than 400 MILLION acres of US land, mostly on farms and agricultural property.
The 2,4,5-T dioxin-containing herbicide was later combined with 2,4-D to create Agent Orange for chemical warfare against Viet Nam.
Both Monsanto and Dow Chemical were aware, since the 1950s, that German company Boeringer was able to produce herbicide 2,4,5-T without any detectable dioxin by slow cooking the chemical for about 12 hours. But Monsanto and Dow ignored this information and cooked their 2,4,5-T batches in 45 minutes or less, thus contaminating the product with dioxin — presumably for higher profits.
Monsanto and Dow Chemical were also aware that dioxin caused health problems. Monsanto and Dow Chemical would go bankrupt if they were actually held accountable for their crimes against humanity and the environment. The herbicide 2,4,5-T was phased out in the late 1970s.
Current Sources of Dioxin Emissions
While dioxin may be produced naturally by forest fires and volcanoes, man-made dioxin emissions are the primary source of contamination. Dioxin has risen dramatically due to an increase in manufacturing of chlorinated organic chemicals (weed killers) and plastics. Here is a list of some of the top sources of dioxin emissions:
Plastics made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC). This includes products ranging from shampoo bottles to wall paper to plumbing pipes.
Incinerating trash (municipal city burning and individual household backyard burning).
Herbicides (weed killers) and pesticides that contain chlorine.
Paper bleaching — most paper products are contaminated.
Medical waste mass-burn incinerators.
After reading this list, it becomes apparent that many industries, especially chlorine manufacturers, herbicide makers, plastic producers and paper mills would be severely affected if dioxin were properly regulated or eliminated. Industrialized farming (Big Ag) also has a big stake in the EPA’s upcoming report because the largest source of human absorption of dioxin is through consuming animal products like meat, dairy and eggs.
View a chart of the top 30 dioxin polluters in the US.
EPA Drags Its Feet in Reporting on Dioxin Hazards
The EPA has delayed its Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of TCDD (dioxin) report for decades due to pressure from Big Industry. For example, President Bush delayed the report in a “last-minute gift” to the chemical industry just before leaving office. Another example is when the EPA and the Chlorine Institute (later the Chlorine Chemistry Council of the American Chemistry Council) were chummy co-sponsors of a conference on dioxin in 1990, indicating that the industry may have undue influence over the EPA.
The EPA has a history of shielding Monsanto from accountability. In the town of Nitro, West Virginia, the Big Monsanto plant produced dioxin-contaminated 2,4,5-T herbicide from 1948 to 1969 and they burned the waste in open pit fires. The EPA has conducted study after study but has failed to force remediation that could cost Monsanto as much as $4 billion.
How To Avoid Dioxin
• A vegan diet is recommended, especially for nursing mothers. Beef and pork contain the highest concentrations of dioxin. Freshwater fish is unsafe.
• Use only oxygen bleach products instead of chlorine bleach.
• Use unbleached paper products.
• Avoid herbicides (weed killers) and pesticides that contain chlorine.
Read the rest of health consultant Jonathan Campbell’s suggestions to avoid dioxin.
Conclusion
It is obvious that collusion between our taxpayer-funded government and Big Industry has resulted in the death and disease of untold numbers of Americans. The criminals of Big Industry will not stop producing dioxin-laced products until they are held accountable.
Hemp can replace many plastics: it is natural, biodegradable, uses little water and no herbicides or pesticides are necessary. Ron Paul is an outspoken critic of the failed war on drugs that prevents the use of industrial hemp. Industrial hemp should not be classified as a drug.
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/carcinogenic-dioxin-set-free-epa-kneels.htmlDioxin is the most toxic man-made chemical known regarding damage to health and the... more
-
-
In a major advance for concerned citizens, the Obama administration has unveiled an interactive website that displays the thousands of major greenhouse gas polluters across the United States. The new site, at ghgdata.epa.gov, features a Google map and charts driven by the greenhouse gas reporting database of facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of greenhouse pollution. The EPA established the rule requiring this reporting in 2009, in response to a law passed under George W. Bush at the end of 2007.
This comprehensive and well-designed site, developed by the government contractor SAIC, makes it easy to find out facts like:
The top carbon polluter in America is the Scherer mega-coal plant in Juliette, Georgia.
The ten most polluting coal plants produce a combined 188 million tons of greenhouse pollution a year.
Kansas has 103 reporting greenhouse polluters.
There are only two major emitters of highly dangerous HFC pollution in the United States, a Dupont plant in Louisville and a Honeywell plant in Baton Rouge.
People can also download the underlying data set for their own analysis.
The site does not display greenhouse pollution from the transportation or agribusiness sectors. The omission of the pollution from the millions of cars across America makes sense, but the exclusion of industrial agriculture pollution is a loophole inserted by Congress to protect the dangerous business model of Big Ag.In a major advance for concerned citizens, the Obama administration has unveiled an... more
-
-
CNN...
Work halted at 4 more Ohio fluid-injection wells in wake of quake
From Maggie Schneider, CNN
updated 6:18 PM EST, Sun January 1, 2012
.
Officials have shut down fluid-injection wells in eastern Ohio in the aftermath of heightened seismic activity in the area.
.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Ohio officials order the closure of four fluid-injection wells near Youngstown
This comes amid a probe looking at links between "fracking" and recent quakes
"We need to get more information," an official says of any possible connection
A magnitude 4.0 quake struck Saturday, one of 11 to occur in the past year
.
(CNN) -- Work has been halted at four more fluid-injection wells in eastern Ohio in the aftermath of heightened seismic activity in the area, a state official said.
Ohio Department of Natural Resources Director James Zehringer had announced on Friday that one such well -- which injects "fluid deep underground into porous rock formations, such as sandstone or limestone, or into or below the shallow soil layer," the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency explains -- was closed after a series of small earthquakes in and around Youngstown.
Then on Saturday, a magnitude 4.0 earthquake struck that released at least 40 times more energy than any of the previous 10 or more tremors that had rattled the region in 2011.
Andy Ware, deputy director of Ohio's natural resources department, told CNN on Sunday that Zehringer and Gov. John Kasich subsequently have ordered the closure of four other nearby injection wells as well.
The decision comes as authorities investigate a possible link between the earthquakes and hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking. That controversial drilling technology involves injecting water, sand and chemicals deep into the ground at high pressure to crack the shale and allow the oil or gas to flow.
Last Friday's order affecting the first well in Youngstown came six days after a magnitude 2.5 earthquake that struck that area around 1:24 a.m. on December 24. After Saturday's larger earthquake, scientists recommended that operations stop at all wells within a 5-mile radius of that original site.
"We need to get more information," Ware said.
The epicenter for Saturday's tremor was 5 miles northwest of Youngstown, 6 miles southeast of Warren and 55 miles east-southeast of Cleveland, the U.S. Geological Survey reported. According to the preliminary estimate, the earthquake struck 1.4 miles deep.
There was a lot of shaking "and a rumbling sound," said Jimmy Hughes, a former Youngstown police chief running for sheriff of Mahoning County. "I could see the house move. ... It seemed like the ground was moving. "
Ohio is far from the edges of Earth's major tectonic plates, with the nearest ones in the Atlantic Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, the U.S. Geological Survey explains on its website. Still, there are many known faults in this region, with the federal agency noting that it is likely there are additional "smaller or deeply buried" ones that haven't been detected.
While earthquakes are not unprecedented in the area, the rate of them in the past year has been unusual. That fact led Zehringer, the Ohio department head, to act late last week.
"While conclusive evidence cannot link the seismic activity to the well, Zehringer has adopted an approach requiring prudence and caution regarding the site," the natural resources department said Friday in a press release, explaining its decision to shut the first well.
Ben Lupo -- CEO of D&L Energy, an independent natural gas and oil exploration, production and marketing group that oversees the first well that was closed -- recently told CNN affiliate WKBN that there's full cooperation with experts, though he expressed grave doubts that the injection wells were to blame for the quakes.
"We have approximately 1,000 wells between Ohio and Pennsylvania and we've never had a problem ... with an earthquake or spill," Lupo said.
Dr. Won-Young Kim, one of the Columbia University experts asked by the state to examine possible connections between fracking and seismic activity, said that a problem could arise if fluid moves through the ground and affects "a weak fault, waiting to be triggered." He explained the underground waste "slowly migrates" and could cause issues miles away, adding that the danger could persist for some time as the fluid travels and seeps down toward the fault.
"In my opinion, yes," the recent spate of earthquakes around Youngstown is related to a fluid-injection well, Kim stated -- though there has been no definitive determination, by the state or other authorities, indicating as much.
There have been "moderately frequent" reports of earthquakes in northern Ohio since the first recorded one was reported in 1823, the federal agency noted. A 1986 tremor, measuring magnitude 4.8, caused some damage. Another in 1998 measured a 4.5 and was centered in northwest Pennsylvania.
.
CNN's Susan Candiotti and Ross Levitt contributed to this report.
.CNN...
Work halted at 4 more Ohio fluid-injection wells in wake of quake
From... more
-
-
Moon countdown: Hours until 1st NASA probe arrives
Spain says deficit bigger than expected, hikes taxes
Court blocks EPA rule in last-minute orderMoon countdown: Hours until 1st NASA probe arrives
Spain says deficit bigger than... more
-
-
Wednesday, at long last, the EPA unveiled its new rule covering mercury and other toxic emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants.
Anyone who pays attention to green news will have spent the last two years hearing a torrent of stories about EPA rules and the political fights over them. It can get tedious. After a certain point even my eyes glaze over, and I’m paid to follow this stuff.
But this one is a Big Deal. It’s worth lifting our heads out of the news cycle and taking a moment to appreciate that history is being made. Finally controlling mercury and toxics will be an advance on par with getting lead out of gasoline. It will save save tens of thousands of lives every year and prevent birth defects, learning disabilities, and respiratory diseases. It will make America a more decent, just, and humane place to live.
A couple of background facts to contextualize what the new rule means:
First, remember that the original Clean Air Act “grandfathered” in dozens of existing coal plants back in 1977, on the assumption that they were nearing the end of their lives and would be shut soon anyway. Well, funny story … they never shut down! There are still dozens of coal plants in the U.S. that don’t meet the pollution standards in the original 1970 Clean Air Act, much less the 1990 amendments. These old, filthy jalopies from the early 20th century, mostly along the eastern seaboard and scattered around the Midwest, are responsible for a vastly disproportionate amount of the air pollution generated by the electricity sector in America, including most of the mercury. They have been environmentalists’ bête noire for over 30 years now.
Second, mercury rules get directly at these plants in a way no other rules have. There’s no trading system for mercury like there is for SO2 (the Bush administration tried to set one up, but the court struck it down). There are no short-cuts either. Every plant that’s out of compliance has to install the “maximum available control technology.” There is some flexibility — more than industry admits — but there’s no getting around the fact that this is going to be an expensive rule. It’s going to kick off a huge wave of coal-plant retirements and investments in pollution-control technology. That is, despite what conservatives say, a good thing, since the public-health benefits will be far greater than the costs. Every country on earth is modernizing its electric fleet. Even China’s ahead of us. These crappy old plants are an embarrassment and good riddance to them.
Third, this has been a long time coming. (Nicholas Bianco has some good history here.) An assessment of mercury was part of the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990. EPA stalled and stalled, got sued, and finally did the assessment. Sure enough, as had been known for years, they found mercury is harmful to public health. Then more stalling and more stalling until the Bush administration’s malformed 2004 proposal, which instantly got caught up in (and struck down by) the courts. So when the mercury rule finally goes into effect in 2014, 24 years will have passed since Congress said mercury needs regulating. It’s been a fight for enviros every step of the way.
So anyway, this is an historic day and a real step forward for the forces of civilization. It’s the beginning of the end of one of the last of the old-school, 20th-century air pollution problems. (Polluters and their rented conservatives will try to kick up dust about this, but check out this letter to Congress [PDF] from a group of health scientists, which says “exposure to mercury in any form places a heavy burden on the biochemical machinery within cells of all living organisms.”) Long after everyone has forgotten who “won the morning” in the fight over these rules, or what effect they had on Obama’s electoral chances, the rule’s legacy will live on in a healthier, happier American people.
by David Roberts, cross-posted from Grist
More at the linkWednesday, at long last, the EPA unveiled its new rule covering mercury and other... more
-
