Tackling the Problem of Plastic Waste on World Oceans Day

June 8 is World Oceans Day an opportunity to reflect on the importance of our oceans as well as solutions to the numerous threats they face. In 2017 the action focus is plastic pollution. Our oceans are indispensable to life of Earth and fate of humanity is intimately tied to their well-being. Our oceans are hotter and more acidic and they are increasingly unable to serve as carbon sinks. Coral reefs are dying and entire aquatic ecosystems are being destroyed. Norwegian billionaire and ocean advocate Kjell Inge Røkke aptly summarized situation when he said, "the oceans are also under greater pressure than ever before from overfishing, coastal pollution, habitat destruction, climate change and ocean acidification, and one of the most pressing challenges of all, plasticization of the ocean. The need for knowledge and solutions is pressing."

Many of these issues are intertwined. For example global warming appears to be contributing to an alarming decline in the amount of dissolved oxygen in the world's ocean. Low ocean oxygen is part of a feedback loop which sees microorganisms produce the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide. These effects could lead to ocean dead zones that are deadly for a number of marine organisms. It could even lead to a complete breakdown of aquatic food chains. These are some of the findings in a large research synthesis conducted by oceanographer Sunke Schmidtko and two colleagues from the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel, Germany. The research was published in the journal Nature.

Market growth

Plastic (celluloid) was invented by John Wesley Hyatt in 1869, however it was the invention and mass manufacturing of cheap oil based plastic in the 1960s that has led our current crisis. In 1965 we were producing about 15 million tons of plastic each year we now produce more than 300 million tons every year.

The plastic market has averaged 5 percent growth per year since 2000 primarily in packaging. Between 2000 and 2015, plastic used in packaging grew from 17 percent of market share to 25 percent. Plastic is now a $427 billion industry in the US alone. It employs nearly one million American workers and it is the third largest US manufacturing industry. Estimates indicate that if the trend continues by 2050 there will be more plastic in the ocean, by weight, than fish.

Existential threat

Yayat Supriatna, an urban planning scholar who has advised the Indonesian government said, "People don’t understand how dangerous plastic can be." Plastic is toxic and can be deadly. It is estimated that one million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals and sea turtles become entrapped in plastic or ingest it and die each year. Plastic is already killing millions of creatures and there is mounting evidence to suggest that plastic may be an existential threat to our species.

Plastic has become ubiquitous because it is cheap, lightweight, strong and durable. Its cheapness is due to the fact that we found a way to make it with oil. Its strength and durability are what makes it so dangerous. Plastic bottles in the ocean will not break down for 4 centuries and even then it lives eternally on as "poisonous confetti".

In 2016 a couple of sperm whales washed up on shores of Germany having starved to death due to a belly full of plastic. This is a redux of a whale found dead in the waters off the Greek isle of Mykonos in 2011. Whales are just one of many creatures that are threatened by plastic waste.

As quoted in a PRI investigative piece, oceanographer Curtis Ebbesmeyer, the man who coined the term "gyres" said, plastic pollution, "makes global warming look like child’s play". He suggests that plastic may even threaten the survival of some species including humans.

He explained the pervasive nature of the threat by saying, "We’re all infected with plastic...Molecules from some kid’s plastic bottle, dropped into the ocean in Asia, are winding up in the food Americans eat." This, Ebbesmeyer said could interfere with reproduction in a number of studies including humans.

There has been a marked decline in sperm counts which some have attributed to plastic pollution. This includes the carcinogenic synthetic estrogen imitators contained in Bisphenol A (BPA). Almost everybody has traces of BPA in their bodies. Research suggests that exposure to plastics can even impact the fertility of subsequent generations. Biological scientist, Frederick vom Saal, told Mother Jones magazine, "A poison kills you. A chemical like BPA reprograms your cells and ends up causing a disease in your grandchild that kills him."

Sizable problem

The scope of the problem is mind boggling. There are massive, swirling patches of plastic in our oceans. Some of the gyres hold around 400,000 plastic particles per square kilometre.

We continue to add 8 million tons of plastic to the oceans every year. There are 5.2 trillion bits of plastic in the sea. The problem is growing so fast that in the not too distant future plastic could soon cover half the planet’s surface. In some places there is six times more plastic in the water than plankton. The problem is growing so fast that in the not too distant future plastic could soon cover half the planet’s surface. In some places there is six times more plastic in the water than plankton.

Americans throw out more than 45,000 plastic bottles per minute or 2.5 million plastic bottles per hour. Globally people use roughly one million plastic bags per minute.

Plastic is now everywhere on the planet. Researchers from Australia’s University of Tasmania and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds found 18 tonnes of plastic garbage (239 items per square metre) scattered across a small South Pacific island 5,000 kilometers from the nearest human occupation.

The threats associated with plastics are significant. University of Tasmania researcher Jennifer Lavers said plastic in the oceans could be as great a threat as climate change. "You put carbon dioxide into the atmosphere or plastic in the oceans and both will stick around," she told New Scientist.

According to an aerial survey by inventor Boyan Slat the problem of plastic pollution in our oceans is worse than we thought. The survey of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, collected over 1,000 large pieces of garbage in under 2 hours.

Government action

France has announced that it is banning all plastic bags, plastic utensils, cups, and dishes by 2020. At the end of 2015, US President Barack Obama signed a bill requiring that American manufacturers end the use of microbeads in products by July 1, 2017 and end the sale of products containing microbeads in by July 1, 2018. In June 2016 Canada's federal government decision added plastic microbeads to the Schedule 1 list of toxic substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), enabling the government to regulate and ultimately ban the substance.

Oceans are not being protected as they should. Taking a page from the oil industry the US the plastics industry lobbyists have been successful petitioned government in an effort to minimize regulatory oversight.

The patchwork of laws and agreements, along with uneven enforcement are problematic. We also must deal with the difficult issue of waters outside national jurisdictions. We need more protections, more science and more transparency.

Business

The problem of plastic waste is a business problem that must be solved by business innovation. Western multinationals like Proctor & Gamble and Unilever, Nestle and Coca-Cola produce much of the world's plastic waste. However, thus far too little is being done to address the problem. "The corporations may offer a bit of charity here and there," Yayat says. "But they don’t really help. They’ll say the environment is the government’s responsibility."

There are powerful incentives driving corporate action. The sustainable plastic market was estimated to have reached $142.42 billion in 2015. In a Triple Pundit article about the new plastic economy Leon Kaye makes the point that the business community needs to drive a transition in the plastics industry.

"There is a large consensus that the plastics economy needs a fundamental rethink and redesign," said Rob Opsomer, the New Plastics Economy Lead with the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, "and that the New Plastics Economy sets an economically and environmentally attractive direction to make that happen."

The single-use plastics industry contributes anywhere from $80 billion to $120 billion in material value losses annually. Further, as referenced above plastic polutes natural environment. This and other environmental problems associated with single-use plastic cost the global economy at least $40 billion a year.

Innovation

There are a number of innovations from the corporate sector that may help. In 2012 Italian company Bio-on unveiled a bioplastics polymer that is 100 percent biodegradable in water and soil. S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. launched an initiative to help build the infrastructure to eventually make Ziploc packaging bags widely recyclable via curbside recycling programs. Ford has replaced plastic car parts with parts made from carbon dioxide. Craft brewery is now making its six pack holders with an edible and biodegradable alternative made of barley and wheat remnants from the brewing process.

In April of this year, the BBC's Helen Briggs reported on a caterpillar that eats plastic.  Researchers at Cambridge University have discovered a plastic eating moth larvae (Galleria mellonella) that breaks down plastic's chemical bonds. It is hoped that researchers may be able to identify microbes in the caterpillar that could be used to dispose of plastic waste in an environmentally friendly fashion. The research was published in the journal, Current Biology.

Alternatives

We know that plastic is very useful, what we need is an alternative to oil based plastics that are not so environmentally harmful. This is especially important in light of the fact that only 14 percent of plastic is currently being recycled. So in addition to doing a much better job of recycling we need to make biodegradable plastics that do not use oil.

A Trucost sustainability focused life cycle report says that plastics cost $139 billion each year. However, it also suggests that plastic alternatives may be worse for the environment. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) funded report is titled, "Plastics and Sustainability: A Valuation of Environmental Benefits, Costs, and Opportunities for Continuous Improvement." The report drew on natural capital assessments and found the environmental cost of using plastics in consumer goods and packaging to be almost 4 times less than existing alternatives (glass, tin, aluminum and paper). In terms of dollar amounts, the report says that non-plastic alternatives comes with environmental costs of $533 billion annually compared to $139 billion with plastics.

However, there are other potentially viable alternatives. One renewable possibility includes hemp and other fast-growing plants containing cellulose. Companies including IBM, Ford and Dell are working to develop viable alternatives to plastics for use in products and packaging. IBM researchers said they have found a way to create cheaper, biodegradable plastic from plants. This follows a plastics recycling process IBM researchers announced last year.

We also need to be wary of false solutions. For example so called compostable plastics are not quite as helpful as it would seem. As explained by Danny Clark, "compostable plastics don’t breakdown and convert into compost or result in nutrient rich soil as the process and name would lead one to believe." Rather than put carbon into the soil, compostable plastics add CO2 (the most abundant greenhouse gas) to the atmosphere.

Circular economy

If it could be made to be viable the circular economy offers the most hope of reducing plastic waste.  The European Commission announced its Circular Economy Action Plan, which is working towards closing the loop on plastics. At a recent World Economic Forum (WEF)in Davos, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation launched the "New Plastics Economy initiative" with the report, "The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics."

As reported by Environmental Leader, this plastics initiative is designed to increase recycling and reuse as well as increase the use of bioplastics. This initiative enjoys the support of some major companies including Amcor, Unilever, Coca-Cola, Dow Chemical and Mars. The launch followed a report that pointed to $3.5 billion in potential environmental savings.

As reported by Thomas Schueneman, new prizes are inspiring innovation. On May 18th 2017, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation announced a $2 million plastics innovation prize in partnership with the Prince of Wales’s International Sustainability Unit. This initiative includes support from more than 40 organizations, including Core Partners Amcor, Coca-Cola, Danone, Mars, Novamont, PepsiCo, Unilever and Veolia. The two part $1 million Circular Design Challenge invites applicants to rethink how we can get products to people without generating plastic waste.

"Working towards circularity in the way we make, use, and distribute plastic packaging will revolutionize the scale of the human footprint on our planet," said Wendy Schmidt, who has already funded two major XPrize competitions focused on oceans. "The value of keeping materials in the economy is massive compared to the losses we suffer when plastic leaks into the very living systems we depend upon for our survival. The New Plastics Economy Prize is a call for creative design and technical innovation at a critical time."

People making a difference

Norwegian billionaire Kjell Inge Røkke has made a fortune from shipping and offshore drilling. He is building the largest and heaviest yacht in the world. What makes this ship exceptional is the fact that it can extract up to five tons of plastic from the ocean every day. Norway's World Wildlife Fund (WWF), will manage the ship which will also be a floating scientific lab for 60 scientists and 40 crew. The ship called Research Expedition Vessel (REV) is scheduled to be completed in 2020 has a number of ecological features that will minimize its footprint. This includes an energy recovery rudder system, medium speed engines, a direct drive diesel-electric propulsion system with battery package, an exhaust cleaning system, ballast water treatment system, low noise, WWF FSC certified woods, and lighting from LEDs.

Related
Plastic Waste in Our Oceans: Problems and Solutions
Green Plastics Report
Infographic - Plastic and the 5 Ocean Gyres 
Video: The Perils of Plastic Waste
The Mass Extinction of Our Oceans May have Already Begun
Chemical Regulation Including Plastics that is Good for Business and the Environment
Plastics and the Greener Cell Phones
PepsiCo Canada's 100% Recycled EcoGreen Bottle Breakthrough
Ford's Flower Powered Green Plastic Replacement
Best Green Automotive Innovations Include Replacements for Plastics
Recycling is a Business Imperative
Water Scarcity and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
Assessing the Value of Our Oceans

Read More»

Partial Summary of Oil Spills in 2016

Fossil fuels are the primary cause of climate change, they are also prone to spills. Such spills are toxic and they have been a consistent part of the fossil fuel industry since its inception. As long as we extract and transport oil and gas spills are a statistical certainty.

In December, Wired reported that there are about 30,000 oil spills in US waters every year. In October, Hurricane Ivan caused dozens of leaks in undersea oil wells and pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico. Some of these spills will leak for decades. The Taylor Energy site will continue to leak between 84 and 1,470 gallons per day for the next hundred years. The oil slick from this spill stretches over eight square miles on an average day. Taylor Energy has gone bankrupt and they just walked away from the mess they created.

Many spills are covered up by oil companies or under-reported (SkyTruth estimates that spills are at least 13 times bigger than the numbers on record). Those that are reported are often ignored. Spills up to 100,000 gallons are classified by the Coast Guard as "minor or moderate". It is important to understand that even small spills are deadly to marine life. They also represent a health risk for humans. Except in the most extreme and egregious cases, there are no penalties and therefore no incentives for the oil industry to clean up its act.

There are thousands of wells and 2.4 million miles of aging oil pipe infrastructure in the United States alone. In 2015 there were countless oil spills (click here to see a partial list of spills in North America) and in 2016 the sad legacy of fossil fuel industry spills continued. Here is a review of some of those spills in 2016.

On December 5, the Belle Fourche Pipeline pipeline spilled 176,000 gallons of crude oil into the into the Ash Coulee Creek in Billings County, North Dakota. This is about 150 miles from Cannon Ball, where protesters are camped out in opposition to the Dakota Access pipeline (President-Elect Trump has said he supports the pipeline). To make matters worse the creek has frozen over making cleanup operations almost impossible. Water supplies from the creek have been turned off. The Belle Fourche Pipeline Co. is part of the family-owned True companies, which also operates Bridger Pipeline LLC. Like almost every other pipeline company they have a long rap-sheet of spills.

On October 21, there was a pipeline leak in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, involving Sunoco, the company that is behind the Dakota Access Pipeline. An 8 inch pipeline managed by the company leaked 55,000 gallons of gasoline into a major waterway, thereby contaminating the drinking water of some 6 million people in Lancaster County. The gasoline streamed into Wallis Run, a tributary of the Loyalsock Creek that eventually drains into the Susquehanna River, considered to be the third most endangered river in the United States by American Rivers, a non-governmental organization (NGO) dedicated to protecting and preserving rivers around the country. While all pipelines leak, Sunoco Logistics spills crude more often than any of its competitors, having experienced more than 200 leaks since 2010.

On October 9, a 1.2-billion-gallon cooling pond dam at Duke Energy's H.F. Lee plant breached killing millions of chickens at factory farms and contaminating local waterways. The leak in the 120-acre coal ash pond in Goldsboro, North Carolina occurred just minutes after Duke Energy issued a statement claiming that the "Ash basin and cooling pond dams across the state continue to operate safely."

On October 2, 95 metric tons of oil leaked into the North Sea from BP's Clair platform. The leak was 46 miles west of the Shetland Islands. There was no cleanup and a large oil slick was visible from the spill. From 2000 to 2011, there were 4,123 separate oil spills in the North Sea. Oil companies were fined for just seven of them. No single fine was greater than about $25,000.

On September 24, a fuel tanker in the Gulf of Mexico caught fire and burned for days. The tanker Burgos caught fire about seven nautical miles off the coast of the port city of Boca del Rio, Mexico. The tanker was carrying about 168,000 barrels of gasoline and diesel fuel. At the time of the incident, the Burgos was sailing from Coatzacoalcos in eastern Veracruz state to the Pemex terminal, Port Authority Director Juan Ignacio Fernandez said late Saturday.

On September 16, two states were forced to declare an emergency after a Colonial pipeline spilled more than 6,000 barrels or a quarter million gallons of gasoline in Shelby County, Alabama. Ironically the states of emergency declared in Alabama and Georgia were not associated with the environmental damage from the spill but due to concerns about fuel shortages. There was no cleanup because it was deemed unsafe for workers to be in the vicinity of the spill.

On September 7, an oil pipeline belonging to Summit leaked a million gallons of fluid containing crude oil into a creek that feeds the Missouri River on a native American reservation. The spill was the largest in Minnesota’s history was on Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation land approximately 15 miles north of Williston, North Dakota. The leak came from a saltwater collection line owned by Summit Midstream Partners LP. The spill flowed into Bear Den Bay, which leads into Lake Sakakawea, a source of drinking water on the reservation. The fluid flowed into the Missouri River and contaminated fresh water for residents in the surrounding areas.

In July, a pipeline leak near Maidstone, Saskatchewan, spilled about 66,043 gallons or 1,572 barrels of diluted oil sands bitumen into the North Saskatchewan River, killing wildlife and compromising drinking water for nearby communities, including Prince Albert.

On June 21, an oil pipeline belonging to Crimson Pipeline LLC ruptured in Ventura County, California spilling an estimated 29,400 gallons of crude oil into an arroyo that flows through the city of Ventura to the ocean. Ironically the spill occurred just after President Obama signed the PIPES safety bill into law.

On June 2, An oil train derailment and explosion along the Columbia river in Oregon contaminated drinking water. At least 12 rail cars carrying Bakken oil operated by Union Pacific derailed and caught fire. The wreck occurred in the Columbia River Gorge near the community of Mosier in Oregon which is about 70 miles east of Portland. The derailment and subsequent fire forced the evacuation of local schools and nearby homes. The I-84 highway was also closed. The rail line runs adjacent to the Columbia river which is widely used for both recreation and commerce. Residents of the town of Mosier had to boil their water.

On May 20, 21,000 gallons or 500 barrels of oil spilled from the underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline near Tracy in San Joaquin County, California. Owned by San Pablo Bay Pipeline a subsidiary of Shell Oil.

On May 12, Shell's offshore Brutus platform spilled almost 88,000 gallons or 2,100 barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The spill endangered corals, dolphins, whales, tuna and whale sharks. The spill in Shell's Glider field created a 13 mile long by 2 mile wide oil slick in an area 97 miles south of Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

On February 3 and January 25 in the regions of Amazonas and Loreto, Peru at least 84,000 gallons or 2,000 barrels of oil were spilled into local waterways after two pipeline ruptures. The Marañon River, a principal tributary of the Amazon River was among the waterways that were contaminated. For indigenous people these spills polluted the waterways that are their lifeline, they provide food and water for crops and consumption. The spills are known to have killed fish, crocodiles, and plants.

There is no safe way of extracting and transporting fossil fuels. Repeated oil spills show the soulless self-interest of oil companies. Rather than repair or replace existing pipelines they invest in expansion.

As Greenpeace stated, "The long history of oil spills around the world has made one thing clear: the only way to prevent an oil spill is to keep oil in the ground."

Related
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tons in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
The Costs of Offshore Drilling

Read More»

Liberal Dualism: Canadian Climate Leadership is at Odds with Ramping Up Fossil Fuels

The ruling federal Liberals have canceled one pipeline and approved two others. It is but the most recent example of Canada's one step forward two steps back approach to climate action.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has the laudable goal of wanting to be a climate champion and an economic leader. However, this balancing act is completely undermined when you add increased fossil fuel production to the equation. Canada was criticized at COP22 for expanding its fossil fuel production and now they have compounded the problem by adding a couple of pipelines to the mix.

Contradictory climate and energy policies

Canadian government energy and environmental policy is a checkerboard of seemingly opposing policy positions. The government announced a carbon tax then followed that up with a massive liquefied natural gas (LNG) project. To further illustrate the two faces of this government, they banned tanker traffic off the coast of northern BC while increasing traffic to the south. Most recently they rejected some pipelines while approving others.

Catherine McKenna, minister of environment and climate change has indicated that she is working towards a nation-wide coal phase-out by 2030 and the National Energy Board is being overhauled. The announcement most welcomed by environmentalists was the news that the government has rejected Enbridge's 1,177-kilometre Northern Gateway pipeline that would have carried oil from Bruderheim, Alta., to an export terminal in Kitimat, B.C..

However as with other recent federal announcements the victory was blunted by the approval of the $6.8-billion, 1,150-kilometre Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project that will ferry 890,000 barrels of oil from Alberta to Burnaby, B.C.

This pipeline along with the approval of Line 3 will ferry a million barrels of oil a day to global markets. According to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency the new capacity will generate up 26 megatonnes of emissions annually when fully operational.

Tankers

The duality of this government is further revealed in its contradictory ocean tanker policies. The Canadian government is investing in a $1.5-billion ocean protection plan to improve responses to tanker and fuel spills in the Pacific, Arctic and Atlantic oceans. But they are also increasing the need for such planning by expanding tanker traffic.

The government announced that it will ban crude oil tankers along B.C.'s North Coast, but further south the Kinder Morgan will increase tanker traffic from approximately five to 34 a month. A spill in this ecologically sensitive area will be devastating.

As reported by the Suzuki Foundation this pipeline will result in a seven fold Increase in tanker traffic and push the already fragile population of 80 resident orcas off of B.C.'s south coast to the brink of extinction. It will also Increase greenhouse gas emissions by more than 100 million tonnes each year and threaten the health of communities along B.C.'s coast. There have been some disastrous tanker oil spills and there is no reason to believe that this new tanker traffic will be any different.


Spills

The government announced that it has also approved Enbridge's 1,659-kilometre, $7.5-billion, Line 3 pipeline, that will ferry oil from a terminal near Hardisty, Alberta, through northern Minnesota to Superior, Wisconsin. This is the largest pipeline project that Enbridge has ever built. The NEB signed off on a new Line 3 in April, but with 89 conditions The pipeline will double the amount of oil transported by the pipeline to 760,000 barrels a day. This will mean that Enbridge's mainline system will collectively carry three million barrels a day into the US. The existing line has leaked many times and rather than focus on maintenance Enbridge is focusing on expanding the pipeline's capacity.

As stated by the Suzuki Foundation, "Oil spills will happen and research proves there is no technology to effectively clean them up." We know that these pipelines will leak, such spills are a statistical certainty for all fossil fuel pipelines.

All you need to do is look at the litany of oil spill in Alberta to see just how common spills are. We have seen 25 massive oil spills (over 1000 tons) in the last decade.  In 2015 alone there were dozens of spills.  Transporting fossil fuels poses a very real danger to the public. The repeated spills reveal the fossil fuel industry's soulless disregard for public safety.

New regulations

To address the serious environmental risks associated with an inevitable spill the government has announced a long list of federal requirements that are designed to act as safeguards. While these efforts may minimize the risk of an incident and maximize preparedness when such a spill occurs, it will not prevent a spill nor can it completely clean them up.

The NEB has a list of 157 conditions that must be met and BC has its list of five preconditions. The premiere of BC recently said that the federal government is "very close" to fulfilling their preconditions. Alberta says it plans to cap greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from the oil patch at 100 megatonnes a year.

Government's logic

Prime Minister Trudeau argued that pipelines have lower emissions profiles, are less dangerous and less expansive than rail transport in tanker cars. As reported by the CBC, Trudeau said

"The decision we took today is the one that is in the best interests of Canada...It is a major win for Canadian workers, for Canadian families and the Canadian economy, now and into the future."

The logic for supporting the pipelines comes down to jobs and revenue. According to Kinder Morgan 15,000 jobs will be created during construction, and a further 37,000 direct and indirect jobs will be added when the project is operational. The pipelines will generate $46.7 billion for all levels of government over the next 2 decades.

However many have criticized this logic in Patrick DeRochie, the director of Environmental Defence:

"The approvals raise grave doubts how these and additional pipelines, including Keystone XL and Energy East, can fit with Canada's commitment to the Paris climate agreement," And Media Placeholder added, "much bigger cuts in other emission sources must be made to compensate for more oil-based emissions."

The fight continues

Protests will continue and so will legal challenges. The Kinder Morgan project threatens a BC First Nation near the project's route, other First Nations, including 39 in BC and Alberta, have signed "mutual benefit agreements" with Kinder Morgan who also claims it has reached agreements with First Nations communities where the pipeline crosses a reserve. Nonetheless, with only one third of First Nations approving the pipeline other First Nations say they are ready for a long battle to stop the pipeline.

Mike Hudema, a campaigner for Greenpeace, said in a recent statement:

"Apparently Justin Trudeau's sunny ways mean dark days ahead for climate action and Indigenous reconciliation in Canada. With this announcement, Prime Minister Trudeau has broken his climate commitments, broken his commitments to Indigenous rights, and has declared war on B.C.,". Media placeholder added "If Prime Minister Trudeau wanted to bring Standing Rock-like protests to Canada, he succeeded."

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said she would be "willing to go to jail" to stop the Kinder Morgan. More court challenges are also expected. As reported by the CBC, "There have already been 11 judicial reviews launched over the NEB review, and more court challenges are expected in the coming days."

Take away

The damage to our climate, our water, our land and our air far outweigh the jobs and revenues associated with pipeline projects.

The election of the Liberal party offered hope and signaled the dawn of a new day for climate action in Canada. The Liberals were a major improvement over the Conservatives on energy and environmental matters. The party's commitment to climate action was reiterated in a throne speech and in a mandate letter to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Shortly after coming to power the Liberals reversed the policies of their Conservative predecessors and showed climate leadership at COP21. They also unmuzzled scientists. They have improved the nation's climate and energy policy and along with provincial leaders Canada is making significant progress on crafting a nationwide renewable energy policy.

The decision to move forward with the pipelines has disappointed may Liberal supporters as it breaks Trudeau's campaign promises. The Liberals appear to be oblivious to the fact that you cannot simultaneously claim to be a climate leader while increasing your production of fossil fuels.

Trudeau campaigned on a climate action platform and while he and his government have made some bold moves to combat climate change he has also significantly increased fossil fuel infrastructure.

Just as pipelines consistently spill, politicians consistently make promises they can't keep.

Related
The Energy East Pipeline is as Good as Dead
The Dakota Access and Protest that Kills Pipelines
Enbridge: If We Can't Build Pipelines we Will Buy Them
Two Down and Two to Go: Half of Canada's Proposed Tar Sands Pipelines Stymied

Read More»

Another Day Another Oil Spill This Time in Alabama (Video)

Although nobody seems to have noticed, between a quarter and a third of a million gallons of gasoline has leaked from a pipeline in the middle of September. The Colonial Pipeline Company reported the spill prompting the governors of Alabama and Georgia to declare states of emergency. The sad fact is that oil and gas spills have become so common that it is no longer construed as newsworthy.

The ecological impact of the spill appears to be secondary to concerns about the interruption of the supply. In Alabama the Pipeline spill triggered a supplier 'Red Alert' and Georgia Gov. Robert Bentley issued an executive order Thursday declaring a state of emergency in Alabama.
The gasoline spill occurred south of Birmingham in Shelby county and shut down a major pipeline connecting refineries in Houston with to New York Harbor. Fuel shortages are expected as a result of having to shut down the pipeline.

Colonial Pipeline, released the following information Thursday afternoon:

"Based on current projections and consultations with industry partners, parts of Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina and South Carolina will be the first markets to be impacted by any potential disruption in supply...Colonial has briefed officials in these states and will continue to provide timely information to the public so that employees and contractors began digging out the leaking pipeline."

The pipeline shut down is expected to cause a spike in gas prices. The failure to report the spill in the mainstream media is a disturbing trend that will make it easier for fossil fuel companies to get away with ecocide.




Related
Another Day Another Oil Spill This Time in Alabama (Video)
Repeated Spills Show the Soulless Self Interest of Fossil Fuel Companies
New Pipeline Safety Law Followed by Another Oil Spill
Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Videos)
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Offshore Oil is an Avoidable Tragedy
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

New Pipeline Safety Law Followed by Another Oil Spill

Mere hours after President Obama signed the PIPES safety bill into law, a pipeline spilled thousands of gallons of oil. Protecting our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act of 2016 became law on June 22nd. Within hours of the signing an oil pipeline erupted in Ventura County, California. It was first noticed by a local rancher early Thursday morning.
The spill emanated from a ten inch underground pipeline owned by Colorado-based Crimson Pipeline LLC. It sent an estimated 29,400 gallons of crude oil down into an arroyo that flows through the city of Ventura and reaches the ocean near the Ventura Pier. The spill marks Crimson’s 11th such incident in the last ten years.

The law was drafted in response to a plethora of fossil fuel spills, especially California's Porter Ranch leak which spewed a staggering 97,000 tons of methane. The PIPES act increases safety provisions in the construction and operation of fossil fuels facilities. It also and gives the government expanded authority to act quickly in the event of a spill. This includes new emergency powers for the Secretary of Transportation.

Oil spills are common throughout North America, but they are especially prevalent in California. On May 19, 2015, a corroded Plains All American pipeline spewed 143,000 gallons of crude oil onto Refugio State Beach in Santa Barbara and at least 25,000 gallons poured into the ocean. The spill created a nine mile oil slick. Governor Jerry Brown called it an "environmental disaster" and declared a state of emergency.

Planes All American Pipeline have been been found guilt of a total of 175 safety and maintenance infractions. The Houston company has been indicted on 46 criminal counts and faces fines of around $3 million due to the Santa Barbara spill. 

In December, more than 8,800 gallons of oil leaked in Somis. In May of this year 21,000 Gallons of oil spilled from the underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline near Tracy in San Joaquin County. These spills and the many others in California take place against the backdrop of the epic Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969.

It is a statistical certainty that pipelines will spill. Just as birds fly, and fish swim, oil leaks. The only way to keep the oil from spilling is to stop it from flowing. 

Oil spills have become commonplace, but we cannot afford to be blase. The preponderance of leaks adds to concerns about the existential threat posed by the climate destroying properties of the commodities they transport.

In the past oil pipelines were the lifeblood of our industrial might, however we now know that they are harbingers of an apocalyptic future. These arteries of death, like the hydrocarbons they transport, must be phased out of our energy mix.

Related
Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Video)
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Shell Downplays Crude Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
Oil Spill in Peru is a Life Threatening Emergency for Local Indigenous People (Video)
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Infographic: 13 Oil Spills in 30 Days
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Second Shell Oil Spill in Less than Two Weeks

For the second time in less than two weeks pipelines belonging to Shell have leaked oil. The most recent spill has leaked 21,000 Gallons (500 barrels) of oil near Tracy in San Joaquin County, California. This time the culprit was the company's underground San Pablo Bay Pipeline which transports crude oil from California’s Central Valley to the San Francisco Bay Area. The spill took place on May 20th but Shell did not report the leak until the evening of Monday May 23.

Ironically, this spill took place against the backdrop of the Altamont Pass Wind Farm, one of California's largest wind energy developments. The juxtaposition of an oil spill against a clean energy producing wind farm speaks volumes.

This is the second time that oil has spilled from this pipeline in 8 months and the second time Shell has reported a spill in less than two weeks.

On May 12, Shell spilled almost 90,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. In an interview with WMNF News, Scott Eustis, a coastal wetlands specialist with Gulf Restoration Network discussed the impacts of the May 12 oil spill on the corals, dolphins, whales, tuna and whale sharks.

“All this is happening while the government is considering new leasing in the Gulf. Although we know from this and many other events that there’s not enough clean-up, there’s not appropriate technologies to take care of the Gulf as a natural resource that belongs to all of us, here, and all of us in the United States. So, we’re calling for no new leasing until the government and industry can show that they can take care of our natural resources.”

Cleanup efforts at the spill site near Tracy are focused on the oil that has reached the surface. Oil is visible on a patch of land that is roughly 10,000 square feet in size. However, the majority of the leaked oil remains underground. California's fire marshal has launched an investigation into the spill.

The company claims that, “no release [of oil] is acceptable“. However, Shell's history of spills mirrors the experience of all oil operations. The extraction and transportation of oil is subject to spills. This is an unavoidable fact of life.

In addition to being the leading cause of climate change, oil spills contaminate soil and water with predictable regularity. In recent days there has been an oil spill at Three Oaks High School in Summerside, Prince County, Prince Edward Island.

Every year there are thousands of spills around the world. A summary of some of the fossil fuel spills in North America last year reveals just how common they are. These spills illustrate the dangers of transporting fossil fuels.

Related
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Oil Spill in Peru is a Life Threatening Emergency for Local Indigenous People (Video)
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Infographic: 13 Oil Spills in 30 Days
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half
After a Failed Cover-up Shell Sub-Contractor Pleads Guilty
Greenpeace forces Lego to Dump Shell
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Another Offshore Oil Leak this Time from Shell

Read More»

Summary of Fossil Fuel Spills in 2015 (Videos)

Oil spills continued to be a problem in 2015 with a number of major incidents in North America. These spills contaminated both land and waterways and prompted the evacuation of local citizens. Whether by pipe, ship, rail or truck, there are well founded concerns about the safety of transporting fossil fuels. These concerns add weight to the argument that we need to expedite the shift away from fossil fuels. Many consecutive years with substantial numbers of spills illustrate the dangers associated with transporting fossil fuels.

Last year in North America alone there were 34 significant spills starting in January and continuing right through to December.  A New York Times report found that in North Dakota alone there were more than 18.4 million gallons of oils and chemicals spilled, leaked, or misted into the state’s air, land, and waterways between 2006 and 2014. The amount of fossil fuels spilled in the Canadian oil producing province of Alberta is even worse.

Here is a review of 33 fossil fuel leaks that occurred in North America in 2015.

January 6 - Williston, North Dakota: A ruptured pipeline operated by Summit Midstream leaked three million gallons of brine into Blacktail Creek and Little Muddy River, tributaries of the Missouri River.

January 14 - Jackson, Mississippi: A section of the Gulf South natural gas pipeline ruptured and exploded. .

January 17 - Glendive, Montana: The Poplar Pipeline running beneath the Yellowstone River ruptured, spilling some 31,000 gallons of crude oil into the water contaminating water supplies for nearby residents.


January 23 - Tioga, North Dakota: Hess Bakken Investments reported a brine spill of more than 100,000 gallons.

January 26 - Brooke County, West Virginia: The 1,265-mile Appalachia-to-Texas Express ethane pipeline ruptured and exploded.


February 4 - Dubuque, Iowa: An 81-car Canadian Pacific freight train derailed and caught fire in a remote area north of Dubuque on the banks of the Mississippi River.

February 14 - Gogama, Ontario: A 100-car Canadian National Railway train carrying crude from Alberta’s tar-sands region to eastern Canada derailed and caught fire in a remote wooded area.

February 16 - Boomer, West Virginia: A 109-car CSX train carrying millions of pounds of crude oil derailed and exploded shutting down a local water treatment plant.  Three oil train wrecks in February beg the question, how many such disasters will it take before we realize that rail transport of fossil fuels is not safe.


March 1 - Peace River, Alberta: A Murphy Oil Company pipeline leaked up to 17,000 barrels of petroleum product into a type of North American bog habitat called muskeg.

March 5 - Galena, Illinois: A 105-car BNSF Railway train carrying Bakken crude from North Dakota derailed and caught fire near the Mississippi River. Twenty-one cars came off the tracks, and five caught fire.


March 7 - Gogama, Ontario: A 94-car Canadian National Railway train carrying Alberta crude oil derailed and burst into flames two miles northwest of the town of Gogama contaminating part of the Makami River, in the Mattagami River System.

March 9 - Houston, Texas: An unknown quantity of toxic chemicals spilled into the Houston Ship Channel after a bulk carrier collided with a Danish tanker carrying 216,000 barrels of the gasoline additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether, or MTBE.


March 9 - Williston, North Dakota: A truck overflow spilled 1,680 gallons of brine, affecting a nearby creek.

April 11 - Arlington, Texas: Vantage Energy spilled thousands of gallons of fracking fluid that poured out of storm drains and into the streets.

April 13, 2015 - English Bay, Vancouver, B.C.: A ship MV Marathassa leaked 2.3 tonnes or 3,100 liters of fuel.


April 17 - Fresno, California: A Pacific Gas & Electric natural gas pipeline exploded at the Fresno County Sheriff's Office gun range, sending a fireball 100 feet into the air and injuring 14 people, two critically.

May 5 - Drumheller, Alberta: TransCanada’s Sieu Creek natural gas transmission line spilled an undetermined volume of sweet natural gas and hydrocarbon liquid onto agricultural land during planned maintenance.

May 6 - Heimdal, North Dakota: At least six tanker cars caught fire after a BNSF oil train derailed.


May 19 - Goleta, California: An underground pipeline owned by Houston-based Plains All American Pipeline ruptured, leaking up to as much as 330 tonnes. Other estimates suggest that a total of 101,000 gallons of crude oil was spilled with an estimated 21,000 gallons leaking into the Pacific Ocean. Nine miles worth of oil slicks eventually washed up on the shores including Refugio and El Capitan state beaches. This spill is in many respects a repeat of a 1969 spill.


June 3 - Little Rock, Arkansas: A Spectra Energy Corp. natural gas pipeline running beneath the Arkansas River ruptured and exploded, releasing four million cubic feet of gas.

June 9 - Unityville, Pennsylvania: A Williams Gas natural gas pipeline ruptured and leaked, resulting in an explosion and fire.

July 10 - Highland, Illinois: A spill at the Plains All American Pipeline Pocahontas pump station sent 4,200 gallons of crude oil into Silver Creek, which empties into Silver Lake, the water reservoir for the city of Highland.

July 10 - Barwick, Ontario: Fourteen cars of a CN train derailed leaking an estimated 12,000 gallons of petroleum distillates.

July 14 - Culbertson, Montana: A total of 22 BNSF cars came off the tracks spilling 35,000 gallons of crude oil.

July 17 - Fort McMurray, Alberta: A high-pressure pipeline at Nexen Energy's Long Lake oil sands facility spilled five million liters of emulsion (a mixture of bitumen, sand, and water) damaging 16,000 square meters of musket habitat.


August 14 - Chateh, Alberta: A NuVista Energy pipeline leaked an estimated 100,000 liters of bitumen emulsion onto the Hay Lake Indian Reserve.

September 19 - Scotland, South Dakota: A 98-car BNSF tanker train carrying ethanol derailed in a rural area, leaking the volatile liquid into pastureland, where it caught fire.

October 23 - Porter Ranch, California: A natural gas well at a Southern California Gas storage facility continues to leak methane at a rate of more than 66,500 pounds per hour or the equivalent of seven million cars per day.


October 27 - Brownsville, Pennsylvania:A coal train derailed and spilled its load along the Monongahela River near the Alicia Transshipment Facility.

November 7 - Alma, Wisconsin: Twenty-five cars of a BNSF train went off the tracks near the Mississippi River, and leaked 20,000 gallons of ethanol into the water.

November 8 - Watertown, Wisconsin: A 100-car Canadian Pacific train carrying Bakken crude oil derailed in southeastern Wisconsin leaking about 1,000 gallons of product.

November 9 - Des Moines County, Iowa: Two engines and 19 loaded coal cars derailed and overturned when a freight train struck a road grader on the tracks.

December 1 - Watford City, North Dakota: A pump leak at a disposal well owned by Wyoming-based True Oil LLC spilled 17,640 gallons of brine.

Here is a review of the five biggest oil spills of all time:



Related
Video - Train Carrying Oil Derails Illustrating the Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Video - Truck Carrying Oil Crashes and Explodes Illustrating the Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels
Three of the Most Destructive Tanker Oil Spills in History
Unstoppable Oil Leak at a Tar Sands Production Site in Alberta
Top 25 Oil Spills Over 1000 Tonnes in the Last Decade
Pipelines and Oil Spills in Alberta Canada
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
The Costs of Oil: BP Liable for up to 90 Billion
Two More Reasons to Move Beyond Fossil Fuels
The Costs of Offshore Drilling

Read More»

The Arctic is still not Safe from Drilling

Although the Obama administration has effectively shut down Arctic drilling the region is far from being protected from the dangers of  fossil fuel extraction. The President has imposed stringent lease conditions on Arctic oil extraction but other Northern nations do not have such restrictive national laws. Countries  including Russia and Norway continue to set their sights on Arctic oil.

Arctic drilling is a source of concern for many reasons including the risks of a spill.  According to Greenpeace there is a 75 percent chance of a serious spill. This would prove catastrophic in this fragile and remote ecosystem.

There is also the overarching issue of emissions contributions at a time when we already have more known oil reserves that can be safely burned. According to the US Geological Society the Arctic holds up to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves. Ironically, global warming caused largely by fossil fuels makes Arctic drilling even more attractive as there is now less ice to contend with.

Shell withdrew from the Arctic because the project became non-viable due to low oil prices. Citing "current market conditions" the Department of Interior has canceled two future auctions of Arctic offshore oil leases in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. They have also denied requests from Shell and other oil companies to secure more time on their existing leases. They have also indicated that existing leases will not be renewed after their expiration in 2020.

The Obama administration appears to have brought Arctic drilling to an end for the remainder of the President's term. Further, all the leading Democratic contenders for president have indicated that they are against Arctic drilling. However, this does not preclude a return of oil companies to the American Arctic at some future date. If a Republican were to take control of the white house we would almost certainly see such a return.  Republicans in Congress, including Alaska's Lisa Murkowski have already made it clear that they want to extend the life of drilling leases.

While US companies may lead the race to extract Arctic oil, other countries are also looking to exploit the regions fossil fuel reserves. Russia's Arctic drilling operations have been delayed by sanctions over the Ukraine, however early in 2015 cooperation between Russian and Norwegian oil companies suggested that Arctic drilling would proceed despite the sanctions.

For example, the Norwegian company Statoil has increasingly close relations with the Russian oil company Rosneft and together they are planning to drill four wells in Russia. Rosneft has a stake in a license in the Barents Sea operated by Statoil. Russia's second biggest oil producer Lukoil is also working with Norwegian and Swedish firms.

It is only due to tensions over the ownership of the remote Arctic Svalbard islands that we are not seeing even more Arctic drilling cooperation between Norway and Russia.

Related
What Activists can Learn from Shell's Arctic Retreat
Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half
The Unacceptable Risks of Arctic Drilling
Video - The Arctic is Under Threat from Shell and Gazprom
The Race to Exploit the Arctic's Resources Ignores the Costs
Oil Spills in Arctic Waters (White Paper) 
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Video of the Oil Rig Belonging to Shell that Ran aground in Alaska
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic
Lawsuit Protecting the Arctic from Oil and Gas

Read More»

Obama Administration Cuts Shell's Arctic Drilling in Half

Shell may be drilling the Chukchi Sea off the coast of Alaska this summer but they will only be able to do half of the drilling they had planned. On Tuesday June 30, the Obama administration announced that it has limited shell's drilling plans in the Arctic citing wildlife protections. The federal government has effectively prevented them from simultaneously boring two wells.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that they want to reduce the noise from the drilling and they are using a 2013 regulation that prohibits drilling less than 15 miles between wells. Shell's plan was to bore two holes 9 miles apart.

Federal regulations demand that Shell have two rigs in the region in case an emergency forces the company to bore a relief well. However, they had planned to put the second rig to work simultaneously drilling a second exploratory well nearby.

This means that while Shell has moved two drilling rigs into the Burger prospect, only one exploratory well can be drilled at a time. Shell will spend $1 billion on the exploratory drilling in the Burger prospect this year bringing their total spend on drilling in the Arctic Ocean to more than $7 billion.

While this will reduce the amount of drilling that will take place in Chukchi Sea this summer, it will likely lengthen the amount of time Shell will be in the Arctic by a number of years. Shell's two rigs Transocean Polar Pioneer and the Noble Discoverer have a very limited drilling window that runs during the ice-out period between July 15th and September 28th.

Before it can begin drilling in the Arctic Shell still needs one more drilling permit from the Interior Department's Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.

The last time Shell tried to drill in the Arctic it did not go well. They lost control of their rig and it ran aground. It was later revealed that they had inadequate safety equipment.

Related
The Unacceptable Risks of Arctic Drilling 
Video - The Arctic is Under Threat from Shell and Gazprom
The Race to Exploit the Arctic's Resources Ignores the Costs
Oil Spills in Arctic Waters (White Paper) 
Shell Pauses its Arctic Drilling for 2013
Video of the Oil Rig Belonging to Shell that Ran aground in Alaska
Shell Oil Rig Runs Aground in Alaska Raising Safety Concerns
Shell's Game with the Future of the Arctic

Read More»

Sustainability in the Apparel Industry and Eco Fashion (Video)

Sustainable apparel and eco-friendly fashion is growing. This type of fashion has a much smaller environmental footprint this includes minimizing waste and eliminating the use of harmful chemicals. For years the clothing industry has been dominated by cheap imports from places like China and India, however, burgeoning consumer awareness about social and environmental issues are pushing brands in more responsible directions.

Nike has been pushed by consumers to become a more sustainable company and Patagonia has made a name for itself by being one of the most responsible and sustainable companies in the world. A host of other brands have also boarded the sustainability train. This includes accessible brands like H&M and North Face, to high end designer brands like Gucci, Calvin Klein and Stella McCartney.

The growth of sustainable apparel has even led to new media outlets focusing exclusively on environmentally friendly fashion trends. One such outlet is called Eco Fashion World (www.ecofashionworld.com). This is the world's essential eco fashion news portal and guide.


Related
10 Reasons Why Patagonia is the World's Most Responsible Company  
Sustainable Green Fashion is Being Buoyed by Growing Consumer Demand
Greenpeace's 5 Step Detox Program for the Fashion Industry
Purtex an Eco-friendly Alternative to Toxic Textiles
List of Hazardous Chemicals Lurking in Your Clothes
Burberry & Primark Vow to Stop Using Toxins in the Manufacturing of Clothes
Growing Eco-Awareness in Clothing Design
Victoria's Secret and Other Clothing Brands Sign on to Greenpeace's Detox Fashion Campaign
Greenpeace's Consumer Powered Pressure Campaigns
Why a Dozen Clothing Giants Have Bowed to Greenpeace
H&M's Sustainability Efforts Now Include Recycling
The Northface Launches a Bold Clothing Recycling Initiative
Puma's Cradle to Cradle Sustainability Leadership
Patagonia May be the World's Most Responsible Company

Read More»

New Charges Against MMA Employees in Lac Mégantic Train Wreck

Several people have been indicted 2 years after the tragic oil train derailment that killed 47 people and decimated the town of Lac Mégantic Quebec. This includes President and CEO of the now defunct Montreal, Maine and Atlantic (MMA) rail company Robert Gindrod, managers and the train's engineer. These people face the possibility of jail terms or fines for violations of the Rail Safety Act and the Fisheries Act.

The tragic disaster spilled vast amounts of crude into the nearby lake and the Chaudière River which contravenes the Fisheries Act and the failure to apply adequate train handbrakes is in violation of the Rail Safety Act.

A total of 6 employees will face these two charges. In addition to the CEO and engineer the general manager of transportation, the director of operating practices, the manager of train operations; and the assistant transportation director will also been charged. They face fines of up to $50,000 each or six months in jail. Although the company declared bankruptcy and was sold last year, it could be fined up to $2 million.

Related
Criminal Charges Leveled Against those Responsible for the Lac Megantic Disaster
The Environmental and Emotional Legacy of the Lac-Mégantic Disaster
The Rail Company that Decimated the Town of Lac Megantic Quebec Sold at Auction
Massive Oil Spill from Train Derailment in the Town of Lac Megantic
MMA's Bankruptcy Protection is Unconscionable
CN Plans to Phase Out Rail Cars that Caused the Lac Megantic Disaster 
More Oil Being Shipped by Rail = More Risks 
Growing Opposition to Shipping Oil by Rail
The Dangers of Transporting Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Obama Clean Energy Budget and Republican Opposition

Here is a summary of the green elements in President Obama's $4 trillion budget for 2016 which he sent to Congress on Monday February 2. Republicans are already expressing their opposition to a number of proposals contained in the budget. This includes higher taxes on wealthier Americans and corporations as well as a number of climate oriented mitigation and adaptation initiatives.

Obama's budget asks for a total of $7.4 billion to develop clean energy technology strategies through the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Agriculture, and the National Science Foundation. His budget seeks to provide permanent tax incentives for the solar and wind industries and extend the investment Tax Credit for solar which is due to expire at the end of 2016. It also contains provisions for updating the national energy grid to accommodate more renewable energy.

There is money earmarked for states including an additional $4 billion fund to encourage states to make faster and deeper cuts to power plant emissions than are required by the EPA's clean power plan. The budget seeks to offer state financial incentives to expand clean energy initiatives and cut greenhouse gases.

As the President who made America a fossil fuel leader the budget seeks ways of minimizing associated emissions. This includes funding for carbon capture and storage, alongside research to measure methane emissions that leak from natural gas operations. 

While much of the budget is geared towards mitigation, there are also a range of proposals focused on adaptation. This includes preparations to manage natural disasters, drought, wildfires, and coastal flooding.

The Obama administration also wants to give $1.29 billion to its Global Climate Change Initiative. This includes $500 million for US contributions to the UN’s Green Climate Fund, the first installment of the $3 billion pledged by the US last November.

Unsurprisingly the budget is already being opposed by Republicans, who now control both chambers of Congress.

Obama's budget proposal follows the 11th hour passage of a $1.1 trillion spending plan in January to fund the federal government for the rest of this fiscal year. The omnibus spending bill, aptly nicknamed the cromnibus bill contained a number of anti-environment riders.

Even though Environmental funding is less than 1.5 percent of the overall federal budget, Republicans singled out these programs for cuts. This included spending cuts to EPA's regulatory oversight budget as well as the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). This budget prohibits the enforcement of efficient light bulb regulations, it blocks future efforts to restrict mining waste and efforts to stop funding for coal plants abroad.

A Grist article explained, "All of these measures demonstrate that the GOP’s real agenda is not to save money, but to free polluting industries from the burdens of social responsibility."

Scott Slesinger, legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, “Republicans don’t want to implement environmental laws or enforce laws that are already on the books.”

Related
GOP Denial and President Obama's Climate Legacy
Cromnibus Bill Foreshadows the GOP's Legislative Agenda
Anti-Environmental Tidings in a Bill to Keep Government Running
Republicans Pass Anti-Science Bill in the House
Republicans Declare War on the Environment
Republican Ignorance and the Latest IPCC Report
Republican Law to Curtail (Environmental) Regulations
Republicans vs Democrats on Climate Change
Republican Climate Deniers are in Control
The Arsenal Republicans will use in their War on Climate
GOP Identifies Targets for their Impending War Against Climate Protections
Climate Denial will Soon be Political Suicide
Republicans Trying to Kill Power Plant Rules
Video - Rep. Peters Calls out GOP Climate Deniers and States it is Time to Act on Climate Change
Republican Opposition to Agenda 21 and a Climate Agreement

Read More»

GOP Denial and President Obama's Climate Legacy

Republicans continue to resist the veracity of anthropogenic climate change despite an endless stream of scientific warnings. The GOP response to President Obama's State of the Union address was given by Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and she did not mention climate change once. The only time she mentioned the environment was in the context of her party's support for the Keystone XL.

The Republican message did not respond to the President's address and Ernst laced her speech with a number of dishonest comments. "Even if we may not always agree, it's important to hear different points of view in this great country. We appreciate the President sharing his," she said.

Ernst's comment is a blatant lie. Throughout most of the Obama Presidency Republicans have had no interest in serious debate, they showed no signs of compromise and have laid down a solid track record demonstrating their vociferous resistance to working with the Democrats.

Ernst declared that as a child she was, "raised to live simply, not to waste." However, it is hard to reconcile this statement with Republican resistance to efforts curb Wall street excesses or engage a low carbon economy.

Even the fact that Obama has made the US the world's largest producer of oil and gas did not earn him favor or foster a spirit of bipartisanship.

The GOP have opposed him from the beginning. His reliance on science to drive policy initiatives on issues like climate change have only emboldened their obstructionism.

In his remaining two years in office, President Obama has no other recourse than to use his executive powers, even though he has used such powers sparingly.

So when the President vetoes a piece of Republican legislation or signs an executive order, understand that this is the only sane response to an anti-science, anti-reason, anti-compromise Republican party.

You cannot expect much from a Republican party with climate denying Senators like Jim Inhofe (R-OK) who continue to say that human-caused climate change is not real. "Man cannot change climate," Inhofe said recently. "The hoax is that there are some people that are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful that they can change climate."

The President is doing what he can to combat climate change, he has laid a foundation that future presidents will have to grapple with. History will record that the Republican party stood in the way.

The GOP will succeed in ensuring that the President will not be able to pass legislation, particularly climate legislation.

The President may be a lame duck, but history will record that the GOP is simply lame.

Related
Obama's Clean Energy Budget and Republican Opposition
Cromnibus Bill Foreshadows the GOP's Legislative Agenda
Anti-Environmental Tidings in a Bill to Keep Government Running
Republicans Pass Anti-Science Bill in the House
Republicans Declare War on the Environment
Republican Ignorance and the Latest IPCC Report
Republican Law to Curtail (Environmental) Regulations
Republicans vs Democrats on Climate Change
Republican Climate Deniers are in Control
The Arsenal Republicans will use in their War on Climate
GOP Identifies Targets for their Impending War Against Climate Protections
Climate Denial will Soon be Political Suicide
Republicans Trying to Kill Power Plant Rules
Video - Rep. Peters Calls out GOP Climate Deniers and States it is Time to Act on Climate Change
Republican Opposition to Agenda 21 and a Climate Agreement

Read More»