+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 42
Latest: eranda
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 9842
Total Topics: 240
Most Online Today: 2
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Author Topic: Pollution  (Read 12355 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #705 on: June 04, 2018, 10:26:25 pm »


Video Shows Insane Tanker Fire 🔥 That Led to Two Houston Pilots Being Awarded the IMO Bravery at Sea Award

June 4, 2018 by Mike Schuler

The MT Aframax River after the allision with the dolphi. Tractor tugboat David B is in the foreground rendering assistance. Image courtesy of ITC City Dock security video / NTSB

On the morning of September 6, 2016, Houston harbor pilots Michael McGee and Michael Phillips found themselves surrounded by towering walls of flames after the tanker they were piloting, the MT Aframax River, lost propulsion and struck two mooring dolphins on the Houston Ship Channel.

The allision punctured the tankers hull plating, causing the release of about 88,000 gallons of low-sulfur marine gas oil which suddenly ignited in a massive fire ball.

Despite the danger, the pilots remained on the bridge and managed to maneuver the vessel away from facilities and other ships in the area while coordinating with first responders. Amazingly, they sustained only minor burns, the only injuries resulting from the fire.

For their efforts, Captain McGee and Phillips were awarded the International Maritime Organization’s Bravery at Sea Award, the IMO’s highest honor for bravery at sea, in recognition of their role in preventing a major disaster on one the nation’s busiest commercial waterways.

While details of the accident have since been chronicled in a NTSB Marine Accident Brief and as well as other recounts of the event, a new video posted online last week gives us the best look yet at what exactly what the pilots, crew members, and responding tugboats were faced with that night.

The video was recorded by a security at the Intercontinental Terminals Company facitility where the tanker was mooring Check it out:


More on the incident as described by the International Maritime Organization:

Captain McGee and Captain Phillips were surrounded by a towering wall of burning fuel as the raging fire quickly spread across the channel, threatening other tank ships and nearby waterfront facilities.

Both pilots remained at their stations on the bridge of the ship during the fire. Captain McGee managed to manoeuvre the stricken and blazing vessel away from surrounding ships and facilities.

Captain Phillips coordinated communications and firefighting efforts with the United States Coast Guard and numerous local fireboats. Captain Phillips rushed to grab a fire extinguisher and put out a fire raging on the port bridge wing.

The inferno was finally extinguished after 90 minutes, leaving both pilots exhausted and suffering minor burns. Captain McGee, using tugs, was then able to bring the damaged tanker safely to a mooring facility.

Read the NTSB Marine Accident Brief: Allision of Tanker Aframax River with Mooring Dolphins

Update: After scouring Youtube for an earlier version of the video above, I came across the following interview with Captain McGee and Captain Phillips in which they describe what happened. It also includes snippets of the same footage:


http://gcaptain.com/video-shows-insane-tanker-fire-that-led-to-in-two-houston-pilots-being-awarded-the-imo-bravery-at-sea-award/
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #706 on: June 06, 2018, 08:30:05 pm »
June 6, 2018

Government Not Paying Attention to Oil & Gas Cleanup

The government is failing to adequately track the cost of cleaning up abandoned oil and gas wells on federal and American Indian lands, according to a new government watchdog report. The analysis from the Government Accountability Office shows that the average cost of cleaning up an abandoned well, based on data collected from over a dozen Bureau of Land Management field offices, was $267,600--a far higher figure than the $171,500 BLM reported in 2010 when it last examined the issue.

"Despite what Republicans keep telling us, the fossil fuel industry🐉🦕🦖 isn't being regulated into the ground," Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), one of the lawmakers who requested the review, said in a statement. "Too often, it's freeloading off the American people, and this report tells us we don't even know how much it's costing us."

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/390739-watchdog-government-isnt-sufficiently-tracking-costs-from-orphaned


Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #707 on: June 08, 2018, 10:07:03 pm »
EcoWatch

By Lorraine Chow

Jun. 07, 2018 01:52PM EST

TransCanada Pipeline Explodes 💥 in West Virginia

SNIPPET:

A newly installed TransCanada natural gas pipeline exploded early Thursday in the remote Nixon Ridge area of Marshall County in West Virginia.

No injuries were reported but flames and smoke from the blast could be seen as far as 20 miles away, residents told local media. Area police told CBS News the fire was "very large—if you can see it from your house, evacuate."

"It sounded like a freight train coming through, or a tornado, and the sky lit up bright orange, and then I got up and looked out the window and flames were shooting I don't know how far into the sky," Tina Heath-Chaplin, of Moundsville, told WPXI.

TransCanada—the same company behind the Keystone pipeline—said the explosion has been contained and an investigation is underway.

"As soon as the issue was identified, emergency response procedures were enacted and the segment of impacted pipeline was isolated. The fire was fully extinguished by approximately 8:30 a.m," the company commented Thursday.

"The cause of this issue is not yet known," TransCanada continued. "The site of the incident has been secured and we are beginning the process of working with applicable regulators to investigate, including the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration."

Full article:

https://www.ecowatch.com/transcanada-pipeline-explodes-west-virginia-2576042392.html
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #708 on: June 09, 2018, 01:47:45 pm »
EcoWatch

Health  Olivia Rosane

Jun. 08, 2018 06:20AM EST

EPA 😈 to Ignore 68 Million Pounds of Chemical Emissions in Limited Risk Assessment

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will limit the criteria it uses to determine the health risks of 10 dangerous chemicals including asbestos, The New York Times reported Thursday.

A 2016 amendment to the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 required the EPA to evaluate hundreds of hazardous chemicals to decide if they should face more restrictions or be banned entirely. But documents released by the EPA last week suggest the EPA is kowtowing to the chemical lobby in the narrow criteria it is using the asses the safety of the first 10 chemicals, restricting its analysis to the risks posed by direct exposure to a chemical, and not the risks associated with exposure to contaminated air, soil and water.

In the case of asbestos, which kills almost 15,000 U.S. citizens annually, the EPA will only consider risks from new uses of asbestos and not risks from asbestos already present in tiles, adhesives and pipes, Newsweek reported Thursday.

President Donald Trump has dismissed health concerns about asbestos, calling it "100 percent safe, once applied," Newsweek pointed out. In 1997's The Art of the Comeback, he blamed the asbestos scare on the mob. "I believe that the movement against asbestos was led by the mob, because it was often mob-related companies that would do the asbestos removal. Great pressure was put on politicians, and as usual, the politicians relented," he wrote, according to Newsweek.

Quote
EPA spokesperson Jahan Wilcox told The New York Times that the agency felt chemical contamination of the broader environment was already regulated by the Clean Air and Water Acts.

But Democratic Sen. Tom Udall of New Mexico, who helped pass the 2016 amendment, countered that the limited risk analysis was not in keeping with the spirit of the law.

"Congress worked hard in bipartisan fashion to reform our nation's broken chemical safety laws, but [Administrator Scott] Pruitt's E.P.A. is failing to put the new law to use as intended," Udall said in a statement.

The Environmental Defense Fund calculated that the EPA's limited analysis would ignore 68 million pounds of emissions yearly.

For example, one of the 10 chemicals is perchloroethylene, a likely carcinogen used as a dry-cleaning solvent and metal degreaser. The analysis will consider harm posed by exposure while cleaning clothes or carpets, but not harm posed by its presence in drinking water in 44 states.

read more:

https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-limited-risk-assessment-2576231762.html
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #709 on: June 14, 2018, 05:55:58 pm »


June 14, 2018

VW fined one billion euros by German prosecutors in diesel emissions scandal

Car giant Volkswagen has been fined one billion euros by German prosecutors over diesel emissions cheating, reports the BBC. The carmaker said it did not plan to appeal the fine, which is one of the highest ever imposed by German authorities on a company, according to the report. But BBC business correspondent Theo Leggett writes in a short analysis that “the fine pales into insignificance compared with the fines and compensation the group has had to pay out in the US - which add up to well over 20 billion euros. If this puts an end to criminal proceedings in Europe, VW may well think it's a relatively small price to pay.”

Find the VW press release in English here.
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #710 on: June 17, 2018, 08:04:49 pm »



Montana Court Agrees Yellowstone Gateway More Valuable Than Gold

Thanks to Earthjustice litigation, a district court judge has ruled that state regulators illegally ignored impacts to water quality and wildlife when approving the exploratory drilling project.

By Jessica A. Knoblauch | May 30, 2018

Jessica is a former award-winning journalist. She enjoys wild places and dispensing justice, so she considers her job here to be a pretty amazing fit.

An access road for drilling rigs and heavy equipment would run through this landscape if two proposed mines are constructed near Yellowstone’s northern entrance. PHOTO COURTESY OF WILLIAM CAMPBELL

Sleeping bag, check. Bug spray, check. Backpack, check.

As people across the country eagerly prepare for their summer vacations, residents and businesses of Park County, Montana, are gearing up to greet them. As the northern gateway to Yellowstone National Park, the aptly named Paradise Valley is itself a destination.

Enjoyed by locals throughout the year, tourists flock to this area to enjoy the full array of the Yellowstone region’s iconic wildlife and magnificent landscapes and to catch a native cutthroat trout in the Yellowstone River’s blue-ribbon fishery. With a lot riding on the tourist season, one thing Park County locals shouldn’t have to worry about is a massive new gold mine driving away tourists. The likelihood of that happening is much less now that a district court has ordered Montana’s regulators to reconsider allowing intensive mineral exploration in the area.

Double Your Impact — Fund Critical Courtroom Fights!

Proposed in 2015 by Canada-based Lucky Minerals, mineral exploration is just the first step in the company’s plans to develop a large-scale gold mine in Paradise Valley that would cause irreversible environmental harm to the park and fray the economic fabric of the region. Travelers gazing at the majestic Emigrant Peak jutting up from the Absaroka Mountains—a refuge for bighorn sheep, elk, grizzly bears, wolverines, and other creatures—would be confronted with the destruction of an industrial mining operation.

But a blemished view of the cinematic Yellowstone landscape is just one of the problems anticipated with this proposal. At full scale, the Emigrant mine would threaten to send acid runoff flowing into tributaries of the Yellowstone River, while nearly 100,000 tons of waste rock containing elevated levels of arsenic would be dumped near tributary headwaters. Even mineral exploration alone threatens to pollute these waters with heavy metals and acid runoff.

Emigrant Gulch aerial view looking east from Emigrant Peak. Lucky Minerials has mine claims on both sides of the gulch on both private and public land. PHOTO COURTESY OF WILLIAM CAMPBELL

Mining and mineral exploration would also carve up precious habitat for endangered grizzly bears, which are already in peril after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife delisted the species in June 2017. (Earthjustice is challenging the agency’s decision.) Wolverines, lynx, elk and other species would also be harmed, as would the local community, which relies on large swaths of connected wildland to support sustainable recreation and a healthy tourist economy. Barreling ahead with gold mining and exploration for short-term financial gain could come at the expense of the primary driver of economic growth in the Yellowstone area: an intact landscape that attracts millions of visitors from around the globe and supports a diverse business community and highly skilled workforce.

Earthjustice, together with local and regional groups, challenged the gold exploration proposal in September 2017 under the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), arguing that state regulators 😈 downplayed and dismissed some very serious environmental risks posed by the project. Those include potentially long-term harm to the iconic wildlife of the Yellowstone region, particularly grizzly bears and wolverines, and threats to clean water 💧 in Yellowstone River tributaries. We also argued that the state didn’t seriously consider the potential that this exploration could lead to much larger-scale development. The court agreed with us on all of our claims.

Subscribe to Earthjustice emails, to learn more ways we’re working to defend public lands.

Quote
“The court’s ruling recognized that exploratory drilling is the leading edge of a much larger threat to these sensitive lands in Yellowstone’s gateway,” says Earthjustice attorney Jenny Harbine, who represented the groups. “We will continue our fight to stop Lucky’s plans to profit by placing our water, wildlife, and magnificent natural landscapes at risk.”  

Though this latest decision is a substantial victory, the fight is far from over. Lucky Minerals could insist on proceeding with gold exploration this summer while regulators conduct a new environmental analysis. If that happens, Earthjustice will go back to court to defend the park and all of its beauty from this short-sighted proposal.

An earlier version of this blog post was published in November 2016.

https://earthjustice.org/blog/2018-may/montana-court-agrees-yellowstone-gateway-more-valuable-than-gold
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #711 on: June 18, 2018, 02:08:51 pm »



Montana Court Agrees Yellowstone Gateway More Valuable Than Gold

Thanks to Earthjustice litigation, a district court judge has ruled that state regulators illegally ignored impacts to water quality and wildlife when approving the exploratory drilling project.

By Jessica A. Knoblauch | May 30, 2018

Jessica is a former award-winning journalist. She enjoys wild places and dispensing justice, so she considers her job here to be a pretty amazing fit.

An access road for drilling rigs and heavy equipment would run through this landscape if two proposed mines are constructed near Yellowstone’s northern entrance. PHOTO COURTESY OF WILLIAM CAMPBELL

Sleeping bag, check. Bug spray, check. Backpack, check.

As people across the country eagerly prepare for their summer vacations, residents and businesses of Park County, Montana, are gearing up to greet them. As the northern gateway to Yellowstone National Park, the aptly named Paradise Valley is itself a destination.

Enjoyed by locals throughout the year, tourists flock to this area to enjoy the full array of the Yellowstone region’s iconic wildlife and magnificent landscapes and to catch a native cutthroat trout in the Yellowstone River’s blue-ribbon fishery. With a lot riding on the tourist season, one thing Park County locals shouldn’t have to worry about is a massive new gold mine driving away tourists. The likelihood of that happening is much less now that a district court has ordered Montana’s regulators to reconsider allowing intensive mineral exploration in the area.

Double Your Impact — Fund Critical Courtroom Fights!

Proposed in 2015 by Canada-based Lucky Minerals, mineral exploration is just the first step in the company’s plans to develop a large-scale gold mine in Paradise Valley that would cause irreversible environmental harm to the park and fray the economic fabric of the region. Travelers gazing at the majestic Emigrant Peak jutting up from the Absaroka Mountains—a refuge for bighorn sheep, elk, grizzly bears, wolverines, and other creatures—would be confronted with the destruction of an industrial mining operation.

But a blemished view of the cinematic Yellowstone landscape is just one of the problems anticipated with this proposal. At full scale, the Emigrant mine would threaten to send acid runoff flowing into tributaries of the Yellowstone River, while nearly 100,000 tons of waste rock containing elevated levels of arsenic would be dumped near tributary headwaters. Even mineral exploration alone threatens to pollute these waters with heavy metals and acid runoff.

Emigrant Gulch aerial view looking east from Emigrant Peak. Lucky Minerials has mine claims on both sides of the gulch on both private and public land. PHOTO COURTESY OF WILLIAM CAMPBELL

Mining and mineral exploration would also carve up precious habitat for endangered grizzly bears, which are already in peril after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife delisted the species in June 2017. (Earthjustice is challenging the agency’s decision.) Wolverines, lynx, elk and other species would also be harmed, as would the local community, which relies on large swaths of connected wildland to support sustainable recreation and a healthy tourist economy. Barreling ahead with gold mining and exploration for short-term financial gain could come at the expense of the primary driver of economic growth in the Yellowstone area: an intact landscape that attracts millions of visitors from around the globe and supports a diverse business community and highly skilled workforce.

Earthjustice, together with local and regional groups, challenged the gold exploration proposal in September 2017 under the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), arguing that state regulators 😈 downplayed and dismissed some very serious environmental risks posed by the project. Those include potentially long-term harm to the iconic wildlife of the Yellowstone region, particularly grizzly bears and wolverines, and threats to clean water 💧 in Yellowstone River tributaries. We also argued that the state didn’t seriously consider the potential that this exploration could lead to much larger-scale development. The court agreed with us on all of our claims.

Subscribe to Earthjustice emails, to learn more ways we’re working to defend public lands.

Quote
“The court’s ruling recognized that exploratory drilling is the leading edge of a much larger threat to these sensitive lands in Yellowstone’s gateway,” says Earthjustice attorney Jenny Harbine, who represented the groups. “We will continue our fight to stop Lucky’s plans to profit by placing our water, wildlife, and magnificent natural landscapes at risk.”  

Though this latest decision is a substantial victory, the fight is far from over. Lucky Minerals could insist on proceeding with gold exploration this summer while regulators conduct a new environmental analysis. If that happens, Earthjustice will go back to court to defend the park and all of its beauty from this short-sighted proposal.

An earlier version of this blog post was published in November 2016.

https://earthjustice.org/blog/2018-may/montana-court-agrees-yellowstone-gateway-more-valuable-than-gold

Driving south into Yellowstone along the river is one of the more picturesque routes I've ever hd the pleasure of experiencing. And....it's on the Hot Spring Tour. I'm only sorry the pine beetles got there before I got to see it. The Yellowstone River flows due north. If you're from Texas, something doesn't seem right about that.


I've only seen Yellowstone in pictures. I am saddened by what is happening there now. The best times are behind us. :(

Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #712 on: June 22, 2018, 06:22:27 pm »


How long before the world runs out of fossil fuels? ???

LAST UPDATED ON JUNE 8TH, 2018 AT 3:57 PM BY TIBI PUIU 

Fossil fuels are the main source of energy in the world, powering much of modern civilization as we know it, from transportation to industrial applications. But this paradigm can’t last forever.

Millions of years to make, only hundreds of years to spend

Fossil fuels have formed over an extensive period of time from the remains of plants and animal that lived hundreds of millions of years ago. Humans have been using them in ample amounts since the 19th century and with our current rate of consumption, fossil fuel resources are depleting much faster than their formation. Naturally, the question arises: how long before we run out?

In the 1950s, geologist M. King Hubbert predicted that the world will experience an economically damaging scarcity of fossil fuels. This idea has remained in the collective consciousness as the Peak Oil theory, according to which the production of oil, as a finite resource, will peak at some point and ultimately decline and deplete. According to some researchers, Hubbert included, Peak Oil is already behind us, and we are now living in a decline.

So, how long before we run out of fossil fuels? In order to project how much time we have left before the world runs out of oil, gas, and coal, one method is measuring the R/P ratios — that is the ratio of reserves to current rates of production. At the current rates of production, oil will run out in 53 years, natural gas in 54, and coal in 110. This is bearing in mind a 2015 World Energy Outlook study by the International Energy Agency, which predicted fossil fuels will constitute 59% of the total primary energy demand in 2040, even despite aggressive climate action policies.

Other researchers, organizations, and governments have different deadlines for fossil fuel exhaustion, depending on the data and assumptions that they make, as well as political affiliation and interests. The American Petroleum Institute estimated in 1999 the world’s oil supply would be depleted between 2062 and 2094, assuming total world oil reserves at between 1.4 and 2 trillion barrels. In 2006, however, the Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) predicted that 3.74 trillion barrels of oil remained in the Earth — three times the number estimated by peak oil proponents. 👀


Is Peak Oil behind us? Not clear

While we know for sure that the exploitation of fossil fuels is limited, estimates can vary wildly because new deposits are sometimes found and new technology enables access to previously untapped oil or gas fields or allows more efficient extraction. So, the challenge in estimating a timescale for fossil fuel depletion lies in the fact that new resources are added fairly regularly. Therefore, we have to keep in mind that all of these estimates are based on R/P ratios and thereby only consider proven reserves, not probable or possible reserves of resources. For instance, in 1980, the R/P ratio suggested only 32 years of oil production from existing reserves. 

A 1977 report issued by the Energy Information Administration concluded that the United States could only access 32 billion barrels of oil reserves and 207 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves. But from then to 2010, the country extracted 84 billion barrels of oil (2.6 times more than the initial estimate) and 610 trillion cubic feet of gas (2.9 times the initial reserve estimate). What’s more, reserves are growing. Today, the U.S. has increased the size of its reserves by a third since 2011 thanks to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking which enable access to oil and gas trapped in underground rock formation. Previously, it wasn’t economically feasible to extract these resources.

As technology continues to improve, both governments and oil & gas companies will be able to access new reserves — some that can’t currently be exploited and others that are still unidentified.

Japan, for instance, is planning to one day extract methane from undersea hydrate deposits — these types of deposits may contain more than twice the amount of carbon as Earth’s fossil fuels.  


Elsewhere, climate change is opening corridors in the Arctic — ironically facilitated by the burning of fossil fuels — that enable extraction of oil that was previously logistically impossible to undertake. It was Russian company Gazprom that brought home the first barrels of oil from the Arctic in 2014, and more have followed since.

Again Russia, this time in partnership with France’s Total and China’s CNPC, wants to start drilling the Arctic in 2019 for natural gas. The $27 billion plant is expected to extract 16.5 million tonnes of natural gas per year.


Keep the oil in the soil

Some might fear that we’ll run out of oil and coal before we get the chance to replace them with renewable energy, thereby triggering a planetary-wide collapse of human civilization.

But that’s an unlikely scenario. First of all, if we burn even 50% of the world’s reserves, we’re screwed ☠️. Forget about the prospect of not being able to turn the lights for a second, and think greater perils: runaway climate change.

Despite having used only a small fraction of fossil fuels, the planet’s atmosphere is already around one degree Celsius warmer on average than it was prior to the Industrial Revolution. A 2016 study published in Nature Climate Change assessed what would happen if we burned all the fossil fuels known to exist on Earth. Assuming a scenario where there are no efforts to curb global warming, by 2300 CO2 would stabilize at roughly 2,000 parts per million (ppm), five times higher than today’s level (~408ppm) — resulting in a total of 5tn tons of carbon dioxide finding its way into the atmosphere.

In this nightmare scenario, global average temperatures would be pushed by 8 degrees Celsius past Industrial levels, with the Arctic bearing the grunt of warming, experiencing temperatures rising by as much as 17 degrees Celsius.

As such, the limiting factor on humans’ fossil fuel use is not the depletion of recoverable fossil fuels, but the crossing of a dangerous threshold past which the planet is no longer able to withstand the byproducts of burning fossil fuels.

Knowing oil and gas won’t ever run out in your lifetime shouldn’t be an excuse to keep using them. Rather, knowing this, we should all take action to ensure that our children and grandchildren actually have a future.  

https://www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/how-long-fossil-fuels-last-43432/

Agelbert NOTE: The part not mentioned in this well referenced article is that our species has NEVER lived in a world where an average 3º Celsius past Industrial levels exists, never mind 8º Celsius past Industrial levels. Anyone who thinks we can delay transitioning to 100% Renewable Energy until the end of this century is dreaming. With PRESENT CO2 levels, 4º Celsius past Industrial levels is guaranteed BEFORE 2100. That means massive sea level rise and severe ocean acification, along with all the other biosphere degrading Catastrophic Climate Change effects. Add to that the FACT that Fossil Fuel Inndustry methane leaks have been seriously underestimated, and you have to move up every negative effect (i.e. positive feedbacks that accelerate heating) closer to us in time, making the situation even more urgent than it already is.   

The problem is GHG caused Catastrophic Climate Change, not lack of hydrocarbons to burn.


Unburnable fossil fuels to stay below 2º C limit

Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #713 on: June 22, 2018, 07:38:36 pm »


June 22, 2018

#Cars #Cities #Transport

Environmental Action Germany

Diesel plaintiff DUH wants driving bans in Germany’s most populous state

Environmental Action Germany (DUH) is pushing for driving bans in polluted cities of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), Germany’s most populous state, for all diesel cars that do not meet the Euro 6 emissions standard, the environmental NGO says in a press release. “State premier Armin Laschet continues to ignore the Federal Administrative Court’s ruling that air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) have to be respected,” DUH says.

The NGO, which set the ball rolling on diesel driving bans in Germany, therefore made an application for compulsory execution of the ruling, i.e. the introduction of driving bans in heavily polluted cities like the state’s capital of Düsseldorf by 2019.

The DUH says that, contrary to Germany’s first diesel bans, which took effect in early June in Hamburg, all roads affected by heavy air pollution should be subject to a driving ban, and that these zones should be extended if diesel drivers simply choose alternate routes.

Otherwise, diesel cars should be banned from entire inner cities. “This is the best way forward,” the DUH says.

https://www.duh.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilung/diesel-fahrverbote-ab-2019-in-duesseldorf-deutsche-umwelthilfe-leitet-zwangsvollstreckungsverfahren/
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9647
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Pollution
« Reply #714 on: June 22, 2018, 10:47:55 pm »


Paris MoU Releases 2017 “White, Grey and Black” List: United States Falls to Grey as Korea, Poland Move to White

June 19, 2018 by gCaptain

bulk ship in egypt By Igor Grochev / Shutterstock

The Paris MoU has approved its 2017 port state control inspection results for 2017 and adopted its new “White, Grey, and Black” performance lists for flag states and Recognized Organizations (ROs).

The Paris MoU’s annual “White, Grey and Black (WGB) List” ranks flag states from best to worst, from flags with a high performance (White) to flags with poor performance that are considered high or very high risk (Black). The List is based on the total number of inspections and detentions over a 3-year rolling period for flags with at least 30 inspections in the period.

The new “White, Grey and Black List” for 2017 is to take effect from 1 July 2018, at which point it is used to calculate an individual Ship Risk Profile. Typically, flags on the “Grey List” and “Black List” are subject to more stringent banning measures.

The Paris MoU consists of 27 participating maritime Administrations and covers the waters of the European coastal States and the North Atlantic basin from North America to Europe. Its mission is to eliminate the operation of sub-standard ships through a “harmonized system” of port State control.

Each year, more than Annually more than 18,000 individual inspections take place on board foreign ships in the Paris MoU ports, ensuring that these ships meet international safety, security and environmental standards, and that crew members have adequate living and working conditions.

In its newly adopted 2017 “White, Grey and Black List”, the Paris MoU included a total of 73 flags – the same number as last year.

This year’s list had a total of 40 on the “White List”, 20 on the “Grey List” and 13 on the “Black List”. This compares with 42 on the “White List”, 19 on the “Grey List”, and 12 on the “Black List” last year.

New to the “White List” this year, i.e. flags with a consistently-high performance record, are the Republic of Korea and Poland. The top performer this year is France, followed by the Cayman Islands, Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom, respectively.

Korea’s move to “White List” comes after one year on the “Grey List”.

Flags with an average performance are shown on the “Grey List”. On this year’s “Grey List” a total number of 20 flags are recorded, an increase of one compared to last year’s list.

New to the “Grey List” this year is the Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and the United States, which were all on the “White List” last year.

The United States moved back to the “Grey List”, ranking as the 43rd best performer behind Algeria and Kazakhstan on the “Grey List”.

From being a non-listed flag last year, Tuvalu is now on the “Grey List”.

The only change to the “Black List” this year is the addition of the Ukraine. The Republic of Congo came in last as the worst performer.

For several years, the Committee has also closely monitored the performance of ROs acting on behalf of flags.

To calculate the performance of the ROs, the same formula to calculate the excess factor of the flags is used. A minimum number of 60 inspections per RO are needed before the performance is taken into account for the list. In the RO performance table to be used for the calculation of the Ship Risk Profile from 1 July 2018, 34 ROs are listed.

In 2017, there was a only a small shift in RO performance compared to last year.

This year, three ROs are in the very low performing position against none last year. Three ROs are in the low performing positions compared to four last year and 17 ROs are in the medium position of the list compared to 19 last year.

Details of the responsibility of the ROs for detainable deficiencies have been published since 1999. When one or more detainable deficiencies are attributed to an RO in accordance with the Paris MoU criteria, this is recorded as “RO responsible” and the RO is informed. Out of 685 detentions recorded in 2017, 99 or 14.5% were considered RO related compared to 13.9% in 2016.

Port State Control regimes carry out inspections on ships to monitor and enforce compliance with international regulations. Since the first regional PSC agreement was signed in 1982 (the Paris MoU), the IMO has since supported the establishment of a global network of eight additional regional PSC regimes.

The nine regimes now cover Europe and the North Atlantic (Paris MoU); Asia and the Pacific (Tokyo MoU); Latin America (Acuerdo de Viña del Mar); Caribbean (Caribbean MoU); West and Central Africa (Abuja MoU); Black Sea (Black Sea MoU); Mediterranean Sea (Mediterranean MoU); Indian Ocean (Indian Ocean MoU); and Persian Gulf (Riyadh MoU). The United States Coast Guard maintains the tenth PSC regime.

During an IMO workshop in October 2017, the world’s Port State Control regimes agreed to consider moving away from black/grey/white lists and towards expanding an individual ship risk profile approach.

You can view the Paris MoU’s complete 2017 “White, Grey and Black” list here (opens as pdf)

http://gcaptain.com/paris-mous-2017-white-grey-and-black-list-united-states-falls-to-grey-as-korea-poland-move-to-white/
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
301 Replies
11106 Views
Last post June 19, 2018, 09:35:01 pm
by AGelbert

+-Recent Topics

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
Today at 05:48:07 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 10:47:55 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 10:32:21 pm

Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 10:21:32 pm

Wind Power by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 10:00:38 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 08:21:48 pm

Photvoltaics (PV) by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 07:00:46 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
June 22, 2018, 06:48:50 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
June 20, 2018, 09:59:21 pm

Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable by AGelbert
June 20, 2018, 09:18:37 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial