+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 

Login with your social network

Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 48
Latest: watcher
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 16867
Total Topics: 271
Most Online Today: 136
Most Online Ever: 1208
(March 28, 2024, 07:28:27 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 130
Total: 130

Author Topic: Pollution  (Read 59453 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #285 on: January 14, 2016, 10:37:54 pm »

Environment IS Life

 Are environmental rights as important as human rights?

Yes they are.

 When people's health and livelihoods are destroyed because of an environment that has become toxic, barren, and sterile the battle is one and the same.

 In this video we meet Pablo Fajardo Mendoza, Ecuadorian lawyer representing 30,000 small farmers and indigenous people in a lawsuit against Chevron. After beginning oil extraction in 1964, the rivers and soil became toxic to the point where hundreds if not thousands of people died from cancer and leukemia. Two tribes became completely extinct. It resulted in an enormous and ongoing humanitarian crisis.

 Deforestation is another way to destroy a people.

 Damage to the eco system IS damage to the lives of the people closest to it.

 This is not any less serious than what we traditionally consider shocking and unacceptable violations of human rights. Let's make the connection clear.

 --Bibi Farber

- See more at: http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/what-isnt-working-1/environmental-rights--human-rights.html#sthash.eKBWiXHM.dpuf

 
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #286 on: January 16, 2016, 06:03:11 pm »
3 Reasons Big Coal Had a Bad Week 

Sierra Club | January 16, 2016 9:59 am

Here are three reasons Big Coal had a bad week:



1. Sec. of the Interior Sally Jewell
announced Friday that the Obama Administration will be putting an immediate suspension on all future and modified coal leases in order to create time and space to fully review the program for its consequences for taxpayers, our environment and the climate. The announcement followed President Obama’s groundbreaking statement in the State of the Union that he would “push to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet.”


2. Arch Coal, Inc., the second largest coal supplier
in the U.S., announced Monday that it would be filing for bankruptcy after suffering several quarters of losses and being unable to restructure its debt. Arch Coal Inc. added its name to a list of nearly 50 coal companies that have filed for bankruptcy since 2012 (including Patriot Coal, Walter Energy Inc. and James River Coal Co.), according to an analysis by SNL energy.

3. Governor Cuomo announced that New York state will phase out coal completely by 2020
. We’ve seen this trend picking up globally over the past few months, as the UK and the province of Alberta in Canada have also recently announced their plans to completely phase out coal. And as the Washington Post points out, clean energy is on the rise.

“A profound shift is happening right now in America’s energy landscape,” Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, said. “One-third of the nation’s coal plants are slated for retirement due to grassroots advocacy, public demand, and increased competition from clean, renewable energy like solar and wind becoming more affordable and more accessible by the day. The markets, the public and our elected officials are increasingly recognizing this transition, making decisions that hit the accelerator on the transition from dirty fuels toward an economy powered by clean energy that works for all.”

http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/16/big-coal-had-a-bad-week/

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #287 on: January 18, 2016, 06:52:32 pm »
Porter Ranch Methane Leak Spreads Across LA’s San Fernando Valley  :P
Lorraine Chow | January 15, 2016 9:36 am

It now looks like the catastrophic Porter Ranch gas leak, which has spewed more than 83,000 metric tons of noxious methane for nearly three months, has spread across Los Angeles’s San Fernando Valley.

On Wednesday, Los Angeles City Councilman Mitchell Englander called on the Southern California Gas Co. to extend residential relocation assistance to residents in Granada Hills, Chatsworth and Northridge who live near the Aliso Canyon gas leak above Porter Ranch. These residents reported symptoms related to the exposure of natural gas such as nausea, vomiting, headaches and respiratory problems.

The researchers have developed the Valley’s first comprehensive map of methane exposure. Photo credit: HEET

This latest development compounds with a new analysis from Home Energy Efficiency Team (HEET). The Cambridge-based nonprofit sent Boston University Professor Nathan Phillips and Bob Ackley of Gas Safety to take methane measurements around the San Fernando Valley for several days and their findings were disturbing.

As the Los Angeles Daily News wrote, “the researchers recorded elevated levels of the main ingredient in natural gas—10 miles away from the nation’s largest gas leak.”

Quote
“It’s not just in Porter Ranch, it’s going all the way across the [San Fernando] Valley,” Ackley told Inside Climate News.
According to HEET, the researchers drove a high precision GIS-enabled natural gas analyzer down the roads around the gas leak to create a comprehensive map of the leak around San Fernando Valley. The red on the map indicates where they drove and the levels of methane they found is shown by the height of the peaks.

Their monitors showed methane levels at 3.4 parts per billion, about twice the level of natural clean air, the Los Angeles Daily News reported. Another measurement showed 127 ppm, or an astounding 67 times above normal.

“Whatever else may be in the gas—benzene , toluene , xylene that is what people may be breathing,” Phillips told Inside Climate News. “Even though we’re not measuring things other than methane  ;), there is a legitimate concern that there is that other nasty stuff in there.”

As Inside Climate News observed: “The findings challenge assurances from the  South Coast Air Quality Management District , the regional air pollution control agency, and the state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment that the leak hasn’t increased residents’ exposure to toxic gases.”    

Dozens of public health and environmental advocates and experts will rally at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency headquarters in Washington, DC tomorrow to press for federal action on the Porter Ranch leak.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/15/porter-ranch-methane-leak-spreads/

Agelbert NOTE: The is something you should know that you will not hear about in the six o'clock news:

"The millennial atmospheric lifetime of anthropogenic CO2" by Archer and Brovkin .

"The notion is pervasive in the climate science community and in the public at large that the climate impacts of fossil fuel CO2 release will only persist for a few centuries. This conclusion has no basis in theory or models of the atmosphere/ocean carbon cycle, which we review here.

The largest fraction of the CO2 recovery will take place on time scales of centuries, as CO2 invades the ocean, but a significant fraction of the fossil fuel CO2, ranging in published models in the literature from 20–60%, remains airborne for a thousand years or longer.

Ultimate recovery takes place on time scales of hundreds of thousands of years, a geologic longevity typically associated in public perceptions with nuclear waste.

The glacial/interglacial climate cycles demonstrate that ice sheets and sea level respond dramatically to millennial-timescale changes in climate forcing. There are also potential positive feedbacks in the carbon cycle, including methane hydrates in the ocean, and peat frozen in permafrost, that are most sensitive to the long tail of the fossil fuel CO2 in the atmosphere."
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-008-9413-1#/page-1

  The prolonged existence of atmospheric CO2

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing, human health depleteing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #288 on: January 18, 2016, 08:52:29 pm »
Why anyone that thinks fossil fuels are okay for now, is WRONG!

The presentation is in English so you may ignore the subtitles.



Have a nice day.
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #289 on: January 19, 2016, 07:55:15 pm »
Blast at Alberta Long Lake oil sands project leaves one dead

Nicolas Torres  January 19, 2016

http://petroglobalnews.com/2016/01/blast-alberta-long-lake-oil-sands-project-leaves-one-dead/

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #290 on: January 26, 2016, 11:12:41 pm »
Polarcus Sets Record With Largest Man-Made Moving Object On Earth  :P

January 25, 2016 by gCaptain


Polarcus Amani doing its seismic thing. They, OF COURSE, claim it is "environmentally sound" (and painted it GREEN for good measure!  ).


Dubai-based  ;) Polarcus is in the process of acquiring an ultra-wide 3D marine seismic project offshore Myanmar, and is breaking acquisition performance records with the largest man-made moving object on earth.

The company’s vessel, Polarcus Amani, is towing an in-sea configuration that measures 1.8km wide across the front ends. With each of the 10 streamers separated by 200m, the total area covered by the spread is 17.6 sq.km.

This is the largest in-sea configuration ever towed by a single seismic vessel as well as the largest man-made moving object on earth, according to Polarcus.

The company is delivering up to 190 sq.km per day, a production rate that is currently unrivalled in the seismic industry.

“Such industry leading operational efficiency in Myanmar by one of our right-sized 3D seismic vessels exemplifies Polarcus’ strategy to deliver fit-for-purpose geophysical solutions to our clients. We work closely with all clients to ensure both their efficiency and data quality objectives are met and exceeded,” Polarcus COO, Duncan Eley stated.

Writing by Nadeem (c) gCaptain

http://gcaptain.com/2016/01/25/polarcus-sets-records-with-largest-man-made-moving-object-on-earth/#.Vqg3Iv9gnm4



Agelbert NOTE: WHAT do these "environmentally sound" seismic vessels DO?        You will never guess.     

To be filed under breathtakingly ORWELLIAN claims.

Quote
Polarcus Limited OSE: PLCS is an offshore geophysical company operating a fleet of seismic research vessels worldwide. The company describes itself as having a strong environmental focus that aims to decrease emissions to both sea and air.[1]  Polarcus vessels have received high energy efficiency and environmental performance ratings.[2][3] 

Polarcus provides worldwide seismic data acquisition services and Multi-Client library data as well as seismic data imaging to help energy companies find oil and gas reserves offshore.      

The company was founded in 2008 in Dubai, UAE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarcus

 
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #291 on: January 29, 2016, 11:39:40 pm »

Vermont Law School researcher authors analysis of Paris agreement on climate change

Jan. 28, 2016, 10:35 am by Press Release

News Release — Vermont Law School

 Jan. 27, 2016

Contact: Mark Cooper, 301-384-2204, markcooper@aol.com

Analysis: Paris Agreement on Climate Change Makes Economic and Public Policy Sense

100-percent renewables pathway can decarbonize global economy and advance global economic development


SNIPPET 1:


Quote
“Contrary to loud complaints that dealing with climate change will cause a disastrous increase in electricity costs,” Cooper said, “a rigorous, least-cost approach prevents such an outcome and may even result in a reduction in the total cost of energy service, while delivering massive public health and environmental benefits.”


SNIPPET 2:


Quote
The analysis examines the impact on costs of low-carbon and low-pollution constraints on the selection of resources to meet the need for electricity. The key economic findings are:

The selection of resources on the basis of their environmental characteristics is almost identical to a selection based on their economic cost.


A rigorous least-cost approach to decarbonization leads to an electricity sector based on 100-percent renewables at a cost for energy services that is likely to be lower than a business-as-usual approach based on fossil fuels and nuclear power.

Neither fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage nor nuclear power enter the least-cost, low-carbon portfolio because their costs are much higher than renewables and do not appear to be decreasing.

A rigorous, least-cost approach to decarbonization accomplishes the goal of reducing other pollution, rendering it “irrelevant” from a policy perspective.

 

http://vtdigger.org/2016/01/28/174889/

   

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #292 on: February 02, 2016, 05:52:42 pm »
Norway regualtor finds ‘serious’ breaches tied to 2015 Statoil gas leak

Staff Writers  February 2, 2016   

The Norwegian Petroleum Safety Authority (PSA) said Tuesday that it found several “serious” breaches tied to a 2015 leak at Statoil’s Gudrun facility in the North Sea.

An investigation by the PSA into the February 2015 incident found that the leak was caused by a rupture in a two-inch pipe in the bypass line directly downstream of the first-stage separator.

The leak prompted a temporary production shut down at the Statoil operated platform.

Statoil estimated the initial leak rate at eight kilograms per second and found that condensate from the first-stage separator had leaked into the open air.

The PSA concluded that the leak spilled about 2,800 kilograms, or about four cubic meters, of condensate, with over one cubic meter of condensate believed to have been discharged into the sea.

Quote
“The leak on Gudrun is regarded as one of the larger hydrocarbon escapes recorded on the Norwegian continental shelf (NCS) over the past decade,” the PSA said.

No one was injured during the accident but the PSA said that, under “slightly different circumstances,” the leak could have resulted “in a major accident with loss of life, substantial damage to material assents and consequences for the marine environment.”

An investigation published by Statoil in May 2015 found that the leak could have been fatal if workers had been exposed to released gas.

The PSA identified nonconformities including “weaknesses in Statoil’s fulfillment of its responsibilities,insufficient robustness in the design, deficiencies in information management and competence, inadequate information at shift and personnel changes, weaknesses in experience transfer and learning” and nonconformities related to the execution of work on electrical installations.

The agency added that several of these nonconformities also involve “weaknesses in management follow-up to ensure that activities are conducted in an acceptable manner.”

The PSA has issued a notification of an order to Statoil that asks the company to address the nonconformities.

The notification of an order is not a sanction and is a preliminary step before the agency makes any administrative decisions.

Statoil has until June 1, 2016 to comply with the order.

http://petroglobalnews.com/2016/02/norway-regualtor-finds-serious-breaches-tied-to-2015-statoil-gas-leak/
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #293 on: February 02, 2016, 07:20:37 pm »
02/01/2016 01:01 PM   

If You Care About Environment & Climate, You'll Love Bernie

SustainableBusiness.com News

by Rona Fried

If you look at what's important to the environmental community, you can't help but notice this is exactly what Bernie Sanders proposes in his platform and legislation he's introduced throughout his career:

•a quick and complete shift to 100% renewable energy - no half measures

•massive investments in energy efficiency

•a carbon tax

•support states that want to ban fracking; bar the fossil fuel industry from public lands; no more dirty pipeline infrastructure

•ban offshore oil drilling and oil and gas exports; ban mountaintop coal mining and place a moratorium on nuclear energy

•an end to fossil fuel subsidies

•move our transportation sector beyond oil through electric vehicles and mass transit, including high-speed rail. Increase fuel economy standards to 65 miles per gallon by 2025, catching up to Europe and Japan.

•real protection and expansion of our public lands for wildlife and biodiversity

•ousting conventional agriculture (ie Monsanto) and fossil lobbyists

•a transition to sustainable agriculture and away from GMO and subsidies for big ag companies

•resources and attention to climate change that treat it as the emergency it is.

Sanders would provide tax incentives for renewable energy permanently and proposes $41 billion for programs that people in the fossil fuel industry transfer their skills to clean energy.

Sanders views climate change as the "single greatest threat facing our planet," at a time when it's still not viewed that way by most of the public. He's correct, of course, and has the nerve to state it.

 He's also correct when he says the reason the US hasn't taken the level of action necessary on climate change is: a "small subsection of the 1% are hell-bent on doing everything in their power to block action."

That's why reversing Citizen's United and getting big money out of politics is so important, he says.

Sanders views a transition to a green economy as we do: the opportunity for new industries to arise that will bring us the next "industrial" revolution, but this time creating tens of milions of well-paying jobs ... that do not foul our environment and peoples' health.

Bernie strongly favors organic agriculture. He co-sponsored legislation to nationally label foods that contain GMOs and wants Monsanto et. al. out of the way.

 And he would nominate Supreme Court justices that reinforce the direction our economy needs to go. 

Bernie says:
Quote

"Right now, we have an energy policy that is rigged to boost the profits of big oil companies like Exxon, BP, and Shell at the expense of average Americans. The wealthiest industry in the history of our planet has bribed politicians into complacency in the face of climate change." 

"Enough is enough. It's time to take on the fossil fuel billionaires, accelerate our transition to clean energy, and finally put people before the profits of polluters."

 "What the scientists tell us is that we have a relatively short window of opportunity to bring about the fundamental changes that we need in our global energy system. It is absolutely vital that we do what many economists tell us we must, and that is put a price on carbon. It is the simplest and most direct way to make the kind of cuts in carbon pollution we need to successfully transition away from fossil fuels to energy efficiency and sustainable energy."

Climate Protection and Justice Act of 2015

 Introduced in Congress last year, this bill sets enforceable targets to reduce emissions from 1990 levels: 40% by 2030, and over 80% by 2050.

 A tax on carbon on fossil fuel producers and importers starts at $15 per ton in 2017 and rises to $73 per ton by 2035, adding another 5% a year after that. 

 The proceeds would go to households making less than $100,000 a year (80% of US families) to offset any rate hikes by fossil fuels companies. They are significant - a rebate of about $900 in 2017, growing to $1900 in 2030.

 It also provides $20 billion a year to the most vulnerable communities for climate resiliency projects; implements a "green tariff" that funds improvements in industrial energy efficiency; and programs that helps farms move to sustainable practices and renewable energy.

 While Hillary Clinton strongly supports much of Bernie's platform, she would never go as far, and the Republicans are a joke. Trump, for example, says climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese to kill US manufacturing.

Bernie was there at the historic Peoples' Climate March, where was Hillary and Obama? 

Read, Ahead of Iowa Caucuses: Archie Bunker, Head versus Heart.

Read our article, One Senator Says: We Must Choose Renewables And Give Fossil Fuels the Boot and Bernie's climate bills introduced in 2013.

Here is Bernie's Climate Platform:
 
Website: berniesanders.com/issues/climate-change/

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26536
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #294 on: February 04, 2016, 10:13:26 pm »
Groundwater problem emerges at Vermont Yankee

Feb. 3, 2016, 5:29 pm by Mike Faher

Vermont Yankee 2010
The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon. File photo
(at link)

VERNON — Greater-than-anticipated amounts of groundwater — 90,000 gallons so far — are encroaching into a key building at Vermont Yankee, and plant administrators are weighing options to deal with the contaminated liquid.

Those options include shipping the water — which an official described as having “slight radioactive contamination” — to an out-of-state storage facility. There also has been preliminary talk of releasing water that is within allowable pollution limits into the Connecticut River, though state officials say they’ve not received any request to do so from plant owner Entergy.

The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission also is monitoring the water situation, and it appears to be improving: The agency noted in a recent inspection report that “the groundwater intrusion rate has slowed considerably” at the nuclear plant’s turbine building, and there is still excess storage capacity to handle it.

“Our inspectors will continue to track Entergy’s efforts to address the issue, but it does not pose any threat to public health and safety,” NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said.

Entergy spokesman Marty Cohn said that, while the amount of water is unexpected, the issue itself was part of the company’s decommissioning plans and will not cause any significant additional costs. “We anticipated this water management program in our decommissioning costs estimate,” Cohn said. “All we’re doing now is figuring out how to dispose of it.”

Vermont Yankee ceased producing power in December 2014, and Entergy has spent the past year preparing the plant for an extended period of dormancy that will precede decommissioning. The NRC says Yankee is in a “post-operation transition phase.”

Last year, the NRC pulled its resident inspector from the plant. But the agency continues to visit and inspect the site. The most recent quarterly inspection report, dated Jan. 28, was based in part on two site visits and identified “no findings of safety significance.”

Within that report, however, is a paragraph saying the plant’s “radioactive water inventories were increasing due mainly to the intrusion of groundwater.” An NRC inspector “determined that VY is considering options regarding future disposal of on-site radioactive water inventory and is also considering options for future action to further mitigate groundwater intrusion,” the document says.

Sheehan said the issue is ongoing. Since the plant shut down, “Vermont Yankee has experienced greater groundwater intrusion into the lowest level of the turbine building,” he said. “Generally, the groundwater totals a few hundred gallons a day, though there are occasional spikes, including one recent day when the amount rose to about 1,500 gallons.”

He cited increased rainfall as one factor. A bigger problem is that the plant is no longer operational, since higher temperatures from power production had led to greater evaporation of intruding groundwater in the past.

Sheehan said Entergy has been working to slow the flow by hiring a contractor to seal cracks in the turbine building and drilling “interceptor wells” nearby. Cohn clarified that those are not deep wells, but rather horizontal holes that act as drainage routes. “What you’re trying to do is redirect the water,” Cohn said.

The NRC inspection report says Entergy is tracking the plant’s water inventory daily, and Sheehan said the company has been pumping and storing groundwater — about 90,000 gallons at this point. He characterized the liquid as having “slight radioactive contamination” after having come into contact with the turbine building.

Cohn said the location of the water is what dictates its contamination status. “Any water that comes into the protected area — rain, etc. — becomes part of our onsite radioactive water inventory,” he said. “We have to come up with ways to dispose of it.”

The NRC says Entergy is developing a radioactive water management plan for Vermont Yankee. Its scope will extend beyond the current groundwater intrusion issue; Sheehan said the site has more than 1 million gallons of radioactive water. That includes water in the torus, a doughnut-shaped reservoir at the base of the reactor building, and in a condensate storage tank.

Shipping radioactive water away from the plant appears to be the most immediate proposed disposal solution.

“One element of this plan would be to ship approximately 200,000 gallons of the torus water to U.S. Ecology Inc. in Idaho by truck for disposal,” Sheehan said. “Entergy last month submitted an exemption request to the NRC seeking approval for these shipments.” It wants an answer by April 15, he said.

While such a shipment falls under federal regulations, state officials say they are aware of Entergy’s request and want to keep an eye on any transfer of radioactive water. “We’re evaluating what kind of monitoring we would want to do,” said Trey Martin, deputy secretary of natural resources.

Some of the water could end up in the Connecticut River. “All nuclear power plants are allowed to discharge slightly radioactive water to adjoining waterways provided the radioactivity is within allowable federal limits,” Sheehan said.

Any proposed discharges would be likely to cause controversy, and they would be regulated by the state. Martin said his agency has no permit requests to review, so he can’t take a position on the matter at this point.

“(Entergy) would have to come to us to talk about a discharge,” Martin said. “If they do come to that, we’ll obviously take a very hard look at that.”

Also watching closely is Bill Irwin, the state Health Department’s radiological and toxicological sciences chief. At a meeting in Brattleboro last week, Irwin made the case for ongoing, intensive Vermont Yankee groundwater monitoring by both Entergy and the state.

“We certainly are interested in what’s occurring there relative both to the groundwater into the turbine building” and Entergy’s disposal plans, Irwin said Wednesday. “Unfortunately, we don’t have a lot of information about that, and I’ve asked for additional information.”

http://vtdigger.org/2016/02/03/groundwater-problem-emerges-at-vermont-yankee/

Agelbert NOTE: The Vermont wit and humor is showcased below in EXCELLENT comments.     


Quote
Bob Stannard 

I wonder if Neil Sheehan has ever stopped to think about how many times he’s said “it’s just slightly radioactive”? How much radiation is safe? Zero. There is no such thing as a safe level of radiation. Much like the lead poisoned water we’re hearing about radiation is cumulative. The more you get; the more you get to keep.

Meanwhile, Entergy is doing what it planned to do all along; confiscate as much of the decommissioning fund as possible and abrogate as much responsibility as possible. They would walk away from all of these old, leaking plants if they could. I’ve never had much faith in Neil Sheehan taking any action that was in the public’s best interest.

The NRC is funded by the industry it oversees. In Vermont we call that rabbits watching over lettuce.  ;) ;D


Quote
Terry Allen

Hi there Vermont, Martin Shkreli here (of 5000% price boost on life-saving drug fame) and I have a solution for you guys for the radioactive groundwater challenge. You are looking at it all wrong!! It is NOT a problem. It is an opportunity. Instead of trucking the radioactive toxic waste water to Idaho, send it to Flint, MI, and sell it to the local populace there. First of all it’s safer than their lead-contaminated water they have been drinking, and second, the health consequences are less documented and further out into the future, when likely Entergy will have figured out how to wash it’s hands (in Perrier) of the whole thing before any law suits wend their way to settlement. Win, win win win, win. Glad to help. The consulting bill is in the mail.  

    Reply
    Greg Morgan

This is not a big problem – and one that has already been solved. Post 3 Mile Island, SNL’s Garrett Morris entered the reactor building with a mop and bucket. Problem solved. I looked for a link to the skit, but couldn’t dig it up. One of my SNL favorites. I am a bit worried about proposing this, fearing that it might be picked up as a good idea!?  ;)

   Reply 
   Jon Warren Lentz

Ship the tainted water to D.C. & plumb it to the Senator’s & Representative’s  drinking fountains.  :D
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #295 on: February 08, 2016, 03:27:08 pm »

Environmental Group Halts Offshore Fracking In California

February 6, 2016 by Reuters 

Gray shading shows area mapped by USGS with interferometric sonar in 2005 (Santa Barbara is off map to left, about 18 km west of Carpinteria). Oil platforms are labeled in white. Bathymetric contours are at 5-m-depth intervals.

Reuters (Reuters) A conservation group said the federal government must stop approving offshore fracking from oil platforms in California’s Santa Barbara Channel under the settlement of a lawsuit it filed.

 The group, the Center for Biological Diversity, in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, had challenged what it said was the U.S. Department of the Interior’s practice of rubber-stamping fracking off California’s coast without engaging the public or analyzing fracking’s threats to ocean ecosystems, coastal communities and marine life.

The settlement reached on Friday prohibits officials from authorizing fracking practices in federal waters until the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement complete an environmental review, the Center for Biological Diversity said.

The pause, however, will not likely affect production at large because California has not been producing much offshore oil lately.

Oil companies have fracked at least 200 wells in Long Beach, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach and in the wildlife-rich Santa Barbara Channel, the Center for Biological Diversity said.

The settlement could potentially affect oversight of all federally permitted offshore fracking, including fracking in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, the group said.

The U.S. Department of the Interior could not be reached immediately for comment.

© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.

https://gcaptain.com/environmental-group-halts-offshore-fracking-in-california/
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #296 on: February 08, 2016, 03:44:31 pm »
South Asian Scrapyards Need To Improve Shipbreaking Practices, NGO Says

February 5, 2016 by gCaptain
Jafrabad ship breaking yard Chittagong

A new report by NGO Shipbreaking Platform reveals that more than 60% of 768 ships sold for scrap last year were broken on the beaches of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, where ship owners have to improve shipbreaking practices.

The shipbreaking yards in South Asian do not provide fundamental labor rights, ignore international waste trade law, and fail to respect international environmental protection standards, according to the report.

The data shows that 768 large vessels were sold to the scrap yards last year, with 469 were broken on the beaches of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Last year, Greek owners sold the most end-of-life vessels to dirty and dangerous shipbreaking sites in South Asia, according to the NGO Shipbreaking Platform. Meanwhile, Bangladesh became the world’s number one destination for scrap ships for the first time in many years.

“Despite a lot of international attention on the problems of shipbreaking on the beaches of South Asia, the statistics for 2015 show that the vast majority of ship owners have not changed their practice for the better. On the contrary, most have opted for one of the worst shipbreaking destination in the world – Bangladesh, where children are still illegally exploited to break ships manually on tidal mudflats”, NGO Shipbreaking Platform Director Patrizia Heidegger said in a statement.

The NGO applauds the European Union’s plan to publish a list of approved ship recycling facilities worldwide by the end of 2016.

“This will satisfy the call from those that demand better practices, including investors such as ABN-Amro and cargo owners such as H&M, Stora Enso and Phillips – none of whom wish to be associated with polluting and harmful end-of-life management of old ships,” according to the group.

The NGO wants shipping companies and their investors to only allow their vessels to go to yards listed on the EU list. It also recommends governments to take steps to ensure national use of the EU list.

https://gcaptain.com/south-asian-scrapyards-need-to-improve-shipbreaking-practice-ngo-says/
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #297 on: February 09, 2016, 07:47:50 pm »
The EU’s diesel problem; glyphosate cancer row; full story of DuPont PFC court battle

February 9, 2016 at 6:51 pm 
Feb 2016 Health & Environment  News Bulletin

Beyond a One-Time Scandal: Europe’s Ongoing Diesel Pollution Problem. More than half of Europe’s passenger fleet is diesel-powered: the emissions scandal has spotlighted the persistent problem of NOx pollution in Europe, where diesel emissions are a major contributor to poor urban air quality. To understand the potential health consequences of the emissions breach, however, one must first understand the risks associated with different components of diesel exhaust. (Environmental Health Perspectives)

EU scientists in row over safety of Glyphosate weedkiller. A bitter row has broken out over the allegedly carcinogenic qualities of a widely-used weedkiller, ahead of an EU decision on whether to continue to allow its use. At issue is a call by the European Food and Safety Authority (Efsa) to disregard an opinion by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) on the health effects of Glyphosate. (The Guardian)

The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare. “The thought that DuPont could get away with this for this long,” Bilott says, his tone landing halfway between wonder and rage, “that they could keep making a profit off it, then get the agreement of the governmental agencies to slowly phase it out, only to replace it with an alternative with unknown human effects — we told the agencies about this in 2001, and they’ve essentially done nothing.” (New York Times)

Weak EU tests for diesel emissions are ‘illegal’, say lawyers. Loopholes in planned ‘real world’ tests allow cars to emit double the standard for NOx pollution and are ‘legally indefensible’ say MEPs, after new advice revealed. (The Guardian)

Science-based medicine versus the Flint water crisis.   One aspect of science-based medicine that is not covered frequently on this blog, aside from vaccines and antivaccine pseudoscience, but perhaps should be, is the intersection of SBM and public health. Unfortunately, living as I do in southeast Michigan right now, I’ve been on the receiving end of an inescapable lesson in what happens when the government fails in its mission to enforce science-based public health issues. I’m referring, of course, to what has become known worldwide as the Flint water crisis. (Science-Based Medicine)


http://healthandenvironmentonline.com/2016/02/09/feb-2016-news-bulletin-the-eus-diesel-problem-glyphosate-cancer-row-full-story-of-dupont-pfc-court-battle/
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #298 on: February 16, 2016, 03:22:02 pm »
French Ecology Minister Calls for Ban on Glyphosate Formulations  ;D

Lorraine Chow | February 16, 2016 2:38 pm

http://ecowatch.com/2016/02/16/france-ban-glyphosate/

Agelbert Comment: YES! Let's hope France joins with Brazil and helps put Monsanto out of business and their chief executives and empathy deficit disordered scientist GMO producers AND the lawyers that defend them  in the poorhouse from heavy fines as legal remedies And/or prison.

Tell Obama to FIRE the Monsanto Mole tools rotting and ruining the US government agricultural and environmental  policies on behalf of profit over planet.

FOR DETAILS, Google any part of the following QUOTE form a revealing article:

QUOTE While there are numerous points of overlap between Monsanto and the United States Government under the Obama administration, the three most important connections are that of Michael Taylor, Roger, Beachy, and Islam Siddiqui—all three of these Monsanto affiliates were appointed to high level positions within the government by the Obama administration.

The Obama administration appointed Michael Taylor, the previous vice president of Monsanto and a current Monsanto lobbyist, to a high level advisory role at the Food and Drug Administration [FDA]. It is virtually inarguable that this appointment constitutes a massive boon for Monsanto and an undeniable conflict of interest for Taylor. Given the fact that Taylor is a lobbyist for Monsanto and is being paid by the agro-giant, it is reasonable to assume that his advice to the FDA is focused upon helping his employer reduce its regulatory burden and improve its profitability. It isn’t a secret who Taylor worked for and we can assume that the Obama administration knew who they were appointing when they did it.

Roger Beachy, the Director of the Danforth Plant Science Center (a Monsanto organization), was appointed by the Obama administration as the Director of the USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture. NIFA is a department of the USDA which focuses on funding research and innovation in the field of agriculture as well developing more efficient ways to produce food. As the major grant-writing division of the USDA, the NIFA department has the ability to grant or reject agricultural research grants. By giving Beachy the Directorship of the NIFA, the Obama administration gave a Monsanto associate the most powerful position in the organization which allocates agricultural research grants. Needless to say, this appointment is a great boon for Monsanto and bad news for any group which disagrees with the agri-business giant.

Islam Siddiqui, a Monsanto lobbyist, was appointed to the post of Agriculture Trade Representative by the Obama administration. Trade representative are tasked with promoting trade of goods within their appointed field (ex. Agricultural trade reps promote the export of American crops). As Monsanto has a controlling interest in American corn production, the appointment of a Monsanto lobbyist to the position of trade representative is a large boon for the corporation. Siddiqui’s government job is to promote the export of American crops and his Monsanto job is to promote the sale of Monsanto crops—it is undeniable that these two jobs present a conflict of interest and will only lead to Siddiqui representing Monsanto’s interests as though they are the interests of the United States.

Appointment of Elena Kagen

The justices that a president appoints to the Supreme Court is one of their most enduring and important contributions to the United States that every president gives the country. During his first term, President Obama appointed two Justices, one of whom was Elena Kagan, the former Solicitor General of the United States. During her time as the Solicitor General, Kagan filed a brief in support of Monsanto.

In 2007, Monsanto was brought to court by growers of alfalfa in California—these growers alleged that their crops were being cross-pollinated with, and thus contaminated by, Monsanto’s GMO crops. After winning an initial legal victory and securing an injunction on Monsanto’s planting of its modified alfalfa, Monsanto appealed the ruling and the case eventually reached the Supreme Court. Despite the fact that the United States government had no interest in the Monsanto alfalfa case, Kagan, the solicitor general wrote an “amicus” brief in favor of Monsanto’s position.

Nobody knows why the Solicitor General’s office decided to get involved in the Monsanto alfalfa case, but it was an unusual act by a supposedly neutral body; there was no rational reason for the US government to get involved in this case. While we don’t know the reason for this brief, it does make many believe that Kagan may be sympathetic to Monsanto’s corporate interests. UNQUOTE

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-controls-both-the-white-house-and-the-us-congress/5336422
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Pollution
« Reply #299 on: February 17, 2016, 08:24:03 pm »
Second Review of EPA’s Fracking Study Urges Revisions to Major Statements in Executive Summary
Wenonah Hauter | February 16, 2016 3:46 pm

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) independent Scientific Advisory Board Members of the Hydraulic Fracturing Research Advisory Panel released today a second review of the U.S. EPA’s draft assessment saying that that they still have “concerns” regarding the clarity and adequacy of support for several findings presented in the EPA’s draft Assessment Report of the impacts of fracking on drinking water supplies in the U.S.

Ray Kemble of Dimock, Pennsylvania, holds a jug of discolored water from his well, contaminated by nearby fracking operations while standing outside of the U.S. EPA building in Washington, DC. Photo credit: Food & Water Watch

Ray Kemble of Dimock, Pennsylvania, holds a jug of discolored water from his well, contaminated by nearby fracking operations while standing outside of the U.S. EPA building in Washington, DC. Photo credit: Food & Water Watch

This second draft report is still very critical of the EPA’s top line claim of no “widespread, systemic impacts” on drinking water from fracking and urges the agency to revise the major statements of findings in the executive summary and elsewhere in the draft Assessment report to be more precise, and to clearly link these statements to evidence.
Quote

In its own words, the EPA SAB “is concerned that these major findings as presented within the executive summary are ambiguous and appear inconsistent with the observations, data, and levels of uncertainty presented and discussed in the body of the draft Assessment Report.”

We are confident that this tension between President Obama’s EPA and the EPA’s own independent advisory board of scientists is a direct consequence of political considerations trumping scientific evidence on fracking, which demonstrates many instances and avenues of water contamination and many areas of problems and harms.

It is encouraging to see the EPA’s Science Advisory Board once again highlighting concern with what was clearly a mis-titled and misleading draft report from the Obama Administration on fracking and drinking water. Now it’s time for action. It’s time for the administration to go back, clearly articulate the hazards its own studies have identified, and honestly address the inherent dangers of fracking we know to exist.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/02/16/epa-fracking-study-revisions/
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37

 

+-Recent Topics

Future Earth by AGelbert
March 30, 2022, 12:39:42 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
March 29, 2022, 08:20:56 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
March 28, 2022, 01:12:42 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
March 27, 2022, 02:27:28 pm

Heat Pumps by AGelbert
March 26, 2022, 03:54:43 pm

Defending Wildlife by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 02:04:23 pm

The Koch Brothers Exposed! by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 01:26:11 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 12:46:08 pm

Books and Audio Books that may interest you 🧐 by AGelbert
March 24, 2022, 04:28:56 pm

COVID-19 🏴☠️ Pandemic by AGelbert
March 23, 2022, 12:14:36 pm