Environment

Global warming, healthy food, clean water, population control, and nature protection. Comprehensive coverage on Environment here.

Holding TVA's Feet to the Fire in Coal Ash Spill
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on January 6, 2009 at 2:29 PM.

This post is co-written by Bruce Nilles, director of the Sierra Club National Coal Campaign, and Lyndsay Moseley, associate Washington representative for the National Coal Campaign.

Today the Sierra Club will put the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) on notice for its negligence surrounding the tragic December 22 coal ash spill at the Kingston Fossil Plant in Roane County, Tennessee. In collaboration with more than a dozen neighbors whose property was directly affected by the spill, along with a coalition of other environmental organizations, we are requesting that a federal court oversee the cleanup and remediation and that the responsible parties compensate local residents.

On December 22, 2008, an earthen dam for a coal ash waste impoundment failed at the Kingston Fossil Plant, releasing a billion gallons of coal ash sludge and contaminated water into the Emory and Clinch Rivers and onto more than 300 acres around the community of Harriman. 

We have Sierra Club members, staffers and volunteers living in this area and who grew up near Harriman - and we've also had some of our staff visit the spill site (including today’s blog co-writer Lyndsay Moseley). The feedback we’re getting from the people there is heart-breaking.

We've seen overwhelming sadness at the loss of their homes and their peaceful way of life. They are concerned about the health threats, and said that, with a few exceptions, they'd received very little information about the real threats from the coal sludge around their homes.

The residents say they are getting mixed signals. The TVA has issued delayed warnings on the health effects of the ash sludge, and cleanup workers are wearing hazardous material suits. The TVA is also telling people the water is fine, but the news reported that the schools will be preparing lunches with bottled water and the schools are encouraging parents to send bottled water with their kids.

On December 27, Appalachian Voices sampled several of the spill's piles and found elevated levels of toxins, including arsenic and lead. Most of this potentially toxic waste remains in or near those waters – both contaminating water and becoming airborne dust once it dries.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Are the 'Winds of Change' Coming to Iran?
Posted by Karl Burkart, Mother Nature Network on January 5, 2009 at 2:44 PM.

It is a little known fact that Iran, a country which according to the US Energy Information Administration has the 3rd largest oil reserve and the 2nd largest natural gas reserve in the world, is actively pursuing renewable energy sources.  Blessed with some of the best wind and solar resources in the Middle East, Iran hopes to gain economic and political leverage by harnessing these natural resources while preserving their fossil fuel commodities for future export. It's a win-win for everyone.  Iran can power its own development without the highly troubling political implications of an expanded nuclear program, and it gets to maintain its strategic oil reserves.  

But there is a problem.  US and EU sanctions prevent technology companies from making any investments in Iran whatsoever, even investments which would support the decommissioning of its nuclear program by providing viable and quick-to-market alternatives.  Fines are heavy -- upwards of 1 million dollars.  The Danish wind power company Vestas was recently forced to pull out of a 15 year contract with Iranian wind farm Saba Niroo, due to heavy political pressures.

As Nader Niktabe, director of Saba Niroo said,  "It's ironic that the West is so vehemently opposed to Iran's efforts to develop nuclear energy (while) it is sabotaging our efforts to develop clean energy sources like wind." The Saba Niroo wind project is now dead, with 50 huge, 70 foot long wind blades lying idle in its warehouse yard. The company may go bankrupt in six months if it is unable to complete and sell the wind turbines.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Dynegy Abandons Plans for 5 New Coal Plants
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on January 2, 2009 at 3:11 PM.

The hints came down in December, but today it is confirmed: Dynegy is abandoning its plans to build five new coal plants as a joint venture with LS Power. Without its larger partner, LS Power will have a very difficult time developing and financing the proposed plants, even though the company has said it will try.

These abandoned plants are in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Iowa and Arkansas, and this is a major victory for the Sierra Club, our partners, and the thousands of people who stood up to Dynegy's dirty plans. Dynegy had been the largest developer of new coal-fired power plants in the country, but due to our efforts the company has now recognized that new coal plants are an economic mistake and the wrong direction for their shareholders and the country. We applaud them for taking this major step forward in securing a clean energy future.

In February 2008 we launched our "Clean Up Dynegy" campaign in response to the two companies' joint venture to build seven coal-fired power plants. Our Dynegy campaign focused on the six states where Dynegy proposed their coal plants - AR, IA, GA, MI, NV and TX. We even set up a website specifically targeting Dynegy: http://www.CleanUpDynegy.org/

Our staff and volunteers in those states worked tirelessly in this effort. They ran a national letter-writing and phone call campaign targeting Dynegy's CEO. In addition to thousands of letters, emails, and phone calls, we organized numerous local protests in the states, including a major rally on May 14th with a broad coalition outside of Dynegy's annual shareholder meeting in Houston. We also met with Dynegy's CEO twice -- once in their Washington, DC, lawyers' offices and once in Sierra Club's Chicago office.

If LS Power decides to continue with these plants, they stand alone. We encourage them and their potential customers to shift their investments into cleaner and lower-cost alternatives like wind, solar, and efficiency that can create new jobs and economic opportunity while cutting pollution, improving public health, and helping solve global warming.

We are thrilled to see the success of this campaign, and we thank our coalition partners as well: Public Citizen, Co-Op America, Rainforest Action Network, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, our own Sierra Student Coalition, and all of the activists and other groups that worked together to make this victory possible.

Even though we enjoy this victory, there is still more work to be done. We will continue to challenge Dynegy's remaining proposed plants in Texas (Sandy Creek) and Arkansas (Plum Point #1). The construction of more coal-fired power plants would be a giant step backward, so we will encourage remaining utilities to abandon their dirty plans and to invest instead in clean energy solutions.

Hero Activist Throws a Monkey Wrench in Big Oil's Land Auction
Posted by dday, Hullabaloo on December 28, 2008 at 4:15 AM.

This activist Tim DeChristopher, who bidded up parcels of land sought by oil and gas interests for drilling is really a hero. I guess the Bureau of Land Management was all upset because an auction broke out at their nice little auction.

The process was thrown into chaos, and the bidding halted for a time before the auction was closed, with 116 parcels totaling 148,598 acres having sold for $7.2 million, plus fees.

"He's tainted the entire auction," said Kent Hoffman, deputy state director for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management in Utah.

Hoffman said buyers will have 10 days to reconsider and withdraw their bids if they think they paid too much.

Huh? Paid too much? If a buyer is paying millions of dollars for oil-rich land, they obviously think it's worth it. What DeChristopher did was prove that the BLM was giving away federal land, basically owned by the taxpayers, to noncompetitive interests at obscenely low rates, and that the bidders would clearly pay more if forced. I thought these capitalists believed in the free market?

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Bush Pushes Scary Midnight Regulations (Many to Last)
Posted by Harry Hanbury, American News Project on December 26, 2008 at 11:54 AM.

George W. Bush is on pace to impose more last-minute changes to federal rules than any president in history. Many consider Bush's "midnight regulations" to be a parting gift to big industry and against the greater public interest. Discussions are already underway to see if the next Congress can undo what the Bush White House has done.

What Is Worse Than Coal in Your Stocking? Coal in Your Drinking Water
Posted by dday, Hullabaloo on December 24, 2008 at 9:16 AM.

The water main break in Montgomery County, Maryland had some compelling visuals to it, with water pouring from the ground and drivers trapped in their cars, so it received some treatment on the cable shoutcasts today. It's a good thing, too, because the rupture of a 44 year-old pipe causing this kind of chaos does show the need for infrastructure repairs, not only as part of a larger fiscal stimulus, but to avoid catastrophes and their ancillary costs, and to maintain vital services which will have tangible benefits for years to come.

But a massive coal ash spill like we saw yesterday in Tennessee - the result of a burst dam at a private coal processing plant - is actually far more dangerous with far more lasting consequences, even if the visuals aren't as stellar.



You're talking about hundreds of acres of toxic sludge, the residue plants create by burning coal to produce energy, which includes mercury, arsenic and lead, spilling into the tributaries of the Tennessee River, poisoning the water supply for multiple communities, including Chattanooga.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

The TVA Coal Ash Impoundment Spill ... Another Risk of Coal
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on December 23, 2008 at 1:00 PM.

Today there is sad news out of Roane County, Tenn.: A retention pond at the Kingston coal-fired steam plant burst, sending more than 524 million gallons of coal fly ash and water into the nearby town of Harriman and Watts Bar Lake. One man was injured when his home was swept off its foundation, and the mudslide also affected 15 other homes.

Reports are that the rush of mud, ash and water now covers 400 acres and is several feet deep in some areas – this coal ash spill is also many times more massive than the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The cleanup is expected to last weeks, but some lives have already been altered forever - and the full environmental impact is not yet known. Fly ash is known to contain numerous toxic chemicals and it’s being reported that some of the spill made it into the Tennessee River – a water supply source for the city of Chattanooga as well as people in Kentucky and Alabama.

And now we have to wonder if the Tennessee Valley Authority is being fully open about what’s in that fly ash water – bloggers are already taking notice, including the Knoxville Sentinel blog and in these two posts here and here. The second post links this an excellent article about the risks.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Obama Is Blinding Us With Science
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on December 20, 2008 at 10:00 AM.

Barack Obama used his weekly radio/video address to introduce members of his science team this morning, but just as importantly, he talked a bit about his vision for the role of science in the coming years.

"From landing on the moon, to sequencing the human genome, to inventing the Internet, America has been the first to cross that new frontier because we had leaders who paved the way: leaders like President Kennedy, who inspired us to push the boundaries of the known world and achieve the impossible; leaders who not only invested in our scientists, but who respected the integrity of the scientific process," Obama said.

"Because the truth is that promoting science isn't just about providing resources -- it's about protecting free and open inquiry. It's about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology. It's about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it's inconvenient -- especially when it's inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us. [...]

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

A Rundown of Bush's Terrible Last Minute Regulations
Posted by Cara, Feministe on December 19, 2008 at 1:14 PM.

Though just last week I got really pissed off at Tim Dickinson's Rolling Stone piece on Proposition 8, this week he has a really good article about all of the last-minute regulations Bush is putting into place as he walks out the White House door.  Of course, we know all about the anti-choice HHS rule . . . but there's a lot more than that.

While every modern president has implemented last-minute regulations, Bush is rolling them out at a record pace -- nearly twice as many as Clinton, and five times more than Reagan. "The administration is handing out final favors to its friends," says Véronique de Rugy, a scholar at George Mason University who has tracked six decades of midnight regulations. "They couldn't do it earlier -- there would have been too many political repercussions. But with the Republicans having lost seats in Congress and the presidency changing parties, Bush has nothing left to lose."

Some of the highlights:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Going, Going, Gone! Bush Auctions Off Wilderness Land in Utah
Posted by Lisa Derrick, Firedoglake on December 18, 2008 at 9:03 AM.

On Friday December 19, the Interior Department will hold an auction of pristine Utah wilderness to oil and gas companies for exploration and drilling. Robert Redford joined members of Congress--lead by Congressmen Baird (D-WA), Hinchey (D-NY), and Holt (D-NJ)--and a coalition of environmental, preservation and business groups to stop the auctions. 

Friday’s sale would include lands that were recently made available to industry through hastily approved resource management plans that will have serious ramifications for public lands. Affected are 3 million acres of land which include the nation’s greatest density of ancient rock art and other cultural resources, which are also the habitat for many native species.

Redford commented about the Bush administration:

What you keep getting shocked about is how devious and secretive -- and basically, in my mind, morally criminal -- their behavior has been. These lands are not Cheney's and Bush's. The lands are ours. ... They're part of our legacy.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Proposed Interior Secretary Salazar: Obama's Most Controversial Cabinet Choice?
Posted by Roberto Lovato, Of America on December 17, 2008 at 5:28 AM.

Just hours after Barack Obama's announcement of Ken Salazar as his choice for Interior Secretary, denunciation of and opposition to Salazar have already turned the Colorado Senator in to the most controversial of President-elect Obama's many cabinet designees. This story in NPR ,"Environmentalists Fuming Over Salazar's New Post," describes the growing disillusion in the environmental community about the Interior Secretary designate Salazar, who Kieran Suckling, head of the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) said, "is very closely tied to ranching and mining and very traditional, old-time, Western, extraction industries. We were promised that an Obama presidency would bring change." A scathing press statement (see below) released by CBD includes a litany of pro-polluter anti-environmental positions taken by Salazar, including his vote not to repeal tax breaks for Exxon-Mobil and his vote for oil drilling of the Florida coast.

Questions about Salazar's past may bring more unwanted negative attention to Obama, who already finds himself fending off questions about Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. One reliable source in the DC environmental community just told me that the Interior Secretary position "may not be closed" because Salazar "has some issues from his past that may come out."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

It's Vilsack: Obama Picks Pro-GMO and Pro-Biofuels Ag Secretary
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on December 17, 2008 at 4:42 AM.

Major news outlets are reporting that Obama will name former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack as his Secretary of Agriculture. If you're at all concerned with genetically modified foods, cloned animals, and biofuels, then this appointment is likely to disappoint. In 2001 Vilsack was named Governor of the Year by the Biotechnology Industry Organization. The Nation has some great commentary on what the Secretary of Agriculture does and why this position is actually a huge deal. Not only does the agency deal with nutrition programs, organic food, and food safety but there's a lot more. Here's John Nichols:

The USDA is a key player when it comes to energy policy, both because of the rise of biofuels and because of the increasingly adventurous grant-making by its Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements Program.

The USDA's Forest Service administers almost 300,000 square miles of national forests and grasslands.

The secretary of Agriculture is, as well, often a definitional player in trade debates -- as the question of how the United States supports farmers remains an essential one when it comes to forging trade agreements and engagement with the World Trade Organization.

With a $97 billion annual budget and roughly 110,000 employees -- more than the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Energy combined -- it is one of the largest non-defense agencies in the federal government. And its hand is everywhere, with thousands of county extension offices spread across every state.

So how will we fare with Vilsack in this position? Nichols again:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Coal Plants: The Next Round of Subprime Loans?
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on December 13, 2008 at 5:42 AM.

This post is co-written by Mark Kresowik, Corporate Accountability Representative for the Sierra Club's National Coal Campaign.

Shortly after the credit markets crumbled this fall, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Yvo De Boer, suggested that it was a good time for banks to review the financial risks of global warming: "We're in this pickle in the first place because these banks made unwise loans.  Giving a loan that doesn't take climate change into account also is an unwise loan."

As UN Climate Change Conference talks in Poznan, Poland wind down, the incoming U.S. administration is gearing up plans to restore the flow of credit and stimulate the economy, led by creating millions of new green jobs through energy efficiency and clean energy.

This is great news for our economy and the environment. But it also means banks and credit rating agencies rushing to green light as many as 100 massive coal-fired power plants. Banks like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Moody's, Standard and Poor's, and Fitch Ratings are betting against the next President of the United States and making a new round of subprime loans.

Coal plants cost billions of dollars to build, and this requires bank loans. In turn, those banks are expecting us to buy power from the utilities for decades, at a high enough price to cover operating costs and pay back the loans.  

Coal plants are also very dirty, spewing millions of tons of global warming pollution and toxic particles into the air. So far we have given companies a free pass, letting them emit as much carbon dioxide as they want.  But with President-Elect Obama and Congress committed to strong action on global warming, the free pollution days are over.

So if companies build new coal plants - 100 plants currently proposed at a cost of more than $250 billion - we will be paying higher electricity prices for more pollution.  

As energy prices soared earlier this year, families and businesses across the country have said "No More!"  Electricity demand has been dropping as people reduce waste and install energy sipping appliances and light bulbs. The incoming administration is planning to help save even more energy. 

In short, we aren't going to need the power from new coal plants.  Just like we didn't want gas-guzzling cars, we don't want pollution-spewing coal plants.

Americans want energy-efficient technology. So when banks and utilities are suddenly without customers willing to buy coal power, expect banks and utilities to be next in line for bailouts.

As energy demand drops further, companies that build risky new coal plants will only have two options - default on loans or raise energy prices even higher.  Defaults on loans hurt the banking system and local communities. Higher prices hurt residential consumers and chase businesses away. We've seen this cycle before.

We can't afford to repeat the same mistakes, but the credit rating agencies and investment banks have put their heads in the sand when they really need to see the efficient, clean energy future ahead.   We hope Congress will urge the same, as we taxpayers are tiring of the bailouts.

Duke Energy Gets Slammed on Mercury Emissions
Posted by Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club on December 5, 2008 at 2:58 PM.

Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers is the self-appointed coal industry leader in the green game -- he even got a nice spread in the New York Times earlier this year on his big ideas for climate legislation. And yet even the greenest of coal groups, Duke Energy isn't even taking basic steps to control harmful emissions like toxic mercury, much less global-warming-causing carbon dioxide.

This week a federal judge rejected Duke's attempts to build its new Cliffside coal-fired power plant in North Carolina without modern mercury and other pollution controls. Now Duke must submit this plan for a state process to review its mercury emissions.

As the first coal plant sent back to drawing board after the D.C. circuit court rejected lax Bush administration mercury rules earlier this year, this case sets a precedent. From an excellent North Carolina Business Journal article on the case:

And of course, Duke Energy is fighting against cleaning up their plants by appealing this case. But for now, we are thrilled with the decision because it is a statement for cleaning up dirty coal-fired power plants.

This case shows yet again that the many corporations pushing for more coal power claiming they can make it clean are instead planning more coal-fired power plants that don't even meet basic pollution emission requirements.

That's the reality. (And speaking of reality -- did you see this week's launch of the new Reality Campaign all about realities of clean coal?)

U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Surged in 2007
Posted by Brad Johnson, Think Progress on December 4, 2008 at 5:04 AM.

According to a new release from the Energy Information Administration, "U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2007 were 1.4 percent above the 2006 total." This increase erases the 1% drop in emissions in 2006, for which Bush claimed credit (even though the decrease was due to an unusually warm winter and high fuel prices). U.S. annual emissions are now 17% greater than they were in 1990. To avoid catastrophic climate change, the International Panel on Climate Change projects that "industrialized countries would need to reduce emissions by 25 percent to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020."