E-NEWS
Consumer Guides to Sustainable SushiOctober 17, 2008Reporting by Roddy Scheer
While each of the groups offer slightly different spins in their respective versions of the guides, they all advise against ordering sushi made from bluefin tuna, freshwaster eel or farmed salmon. These species are either overfished, farmed with aquaculture methods that pollute the ocean, or are harvested in such a way as to cause the destruction of ocean habitats or kill large numbers of other marine species. Meanwhile, sushi made from wild-caught Alaska salmon, farmed scallops and Pacific halibut are considered more sustainable choices by the groups, as each comes from abundant, well-managed fisheries or, in the case of scallops, are raised using sustainable aquaculture methods. “For the first time, sushi lovers have tools that enable them to join the growing movement of those making ocean-friendly choices that protect life in the seas now and for generations to come,” Blue Ocean Institute executive director Julie Pareles told reporters in announcing the publication of the new guides. Source: Blue Ocean Institute |
|||||
Bush Opens Parks to Mountain BikesOctober 17, 2008Reporting by Roddy Scheer
But there’s a downside, say environmentalists. According to the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), mountain biking on trails can cause erosion, damage native plants and disturb other trail users, and as such has no place in the country’s national parks. The group is trying to marshal public support against the plan. “This is a lame duck gift for our Mountain-Biker-in-Chief,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “With all the troubles facing the country, the White House should be concerned about more than where the president can ride his bike.” Source: Peer |
|||||
COMMENTARY: The Oily Truth about AsbestosAsbestos Risks Remain All Too Real as Our Oil Consumption ContinuesBy Dave Latimer
There are about 150 operating oil refineries within the United States, all constructed before 1976 and the initiation of asbestos usage regulations in the early 1980s by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Prior to these regulations, asbestos was widely used due to its insulating capabilities and was found in a variety of construction materials, including insulation, drywall compound, acoustical plaster, roofing tiles, floor and ceiling tiles and even duct tape. Because the oil refining process requires extremely high temperatures, pipes were generally lined with asbestos-containing insulation.
Oil refinery workers are at a heightened risk of developing mesothelioma, and some may have been exposed to asbestos without even understanding the potential health implications. However, it is not only the workers who are at an increased risk. The residents who live near U.S. refineries also face the risk of asbestos inhalation, especially if there is a fire or explosion. If asbestos fibers become airborne, they can travel to areas nearby via wind currents and may be inhaled by innocent residents and their children. It is crucial that we recognize not only the environmental impact of U.S. oil refinery operations, but the health and safety issues as well. Decreasing our reliance on fossil fuel use and closing the oil refineries would protect our environment and ultimately lead to a decrease in occupational asbestos exposure. If fewer people are exposed to asbestos, fewer people will be affected by mesothelioma cancer, and that is one trend that we can all buy into. DAVE LATIMER represents the Mesothelioma and Asbestos Awareness Center, an asbestos health resource site dedicated to spreading knowledge about mesothelioma and the hazards of asbestos exposure. |
|||||
Better BelchingBy Jessica Rae Patton
|
|||||
Taking Back the EPAFixing the Agency That Bush BrokeBy Jori Lewis Something is wrong at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In recent years, there have been congressional investigations into political collusion with chemical industry forces, outcry about the quiet closure of EPA libraries and a steady stream of high-level agency officials filing out the door in protest. All of this has damaged the credibility of the agency, says Jeff Ruch, the executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
“What has been most remarkable,” says Vickie Patton, the deputy general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, “is the extent to which the judiciary has provided a very unmistakable check on the EPA’s policies, [policies] that have really strained the nation’s clean air laws in ways that Congress never intended.” Take the mercury emissions case. Mercury is a persistent neurotoxin that can find its way from fish to humans, where it can cause myriad health problems. Regulations under the Clean Air Act mandated stringent controls—some would have reduced mercury emissions by 90%. In 2005, the EPA passed a regulation that would require coal-fired power plants to reduce emissions by only 70% and use a cap-and-trade system that would allow cleaner plants to trade unused emissions. “These rules came right out of the White House,” says Dr. Francesca Grifo, director of the Scientific Integrity Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). She says that EPA scientists were told to come up with the data to justify such a change in policy. “Their own inspector general at the EPA found that EPA scientists were pressured to change their analyses and their findings to agree with a predetermined value for a national cap on mercury emissions.” A federal court ruled in February that the new rules don’t go as far they should to protect the public from mercury. Grifo says this is an egregious example, but one that is hardly unique in Bush’s EPA. There have been tales of suppressed research; of reports kept in draft form so they don’t have to be released to the public; and of political retaliation for those who stray off message. Political Squeeze Mary Gade, a lifelong Republican, was, until May, the Midwestern regional administrator of the EPA. She told the Chicago Tribune that she was forced to resign after contentious negotiations with Dow Chemical about cleaning up a dioxin-contaminated site near the company’s Michigan headquarters. Later, a federal court mandated cleanup, but Gade was long gone. Grifo says that for years the UCS has been hearing anecdotes about scientific tampering and marginalization at the agency, so they sent EPA scientists a questionnaire to “take the pulse of the agency.” The results were released earlier this year—and it’s a picture of an EPA, she says, that is coming down against science, against enforcement and, essentially, against itself. Of the nearly 1,600 respondents, over half of them cited at least one instance of political interference in their work over the last five years. Some is to be expected. PEER, which Ruch describes as “a shelter for battered staff,” has been fielding complaints from whistleblower public employees at agencies like the EPA and the Department of the Interior for more than a decade. But not like this, Ruch says. “If you talk to people who work for the EPA, they’ll tell you they’ve never seen it so bad,” he says. When President Richard Nixon created the EPA in 1970, he established its mission: “to protect human health and the environment.” Grifo says the EPA was designed to be an agency that would establish its guidelines based on the best available science. But she says there is a systemic problem. “The problem is with the centralization of decision making,” says Grifo. In other words, the agency is only as good as its administrator. When President George W. Bush came to office, he chose Christine Todd Whitman to head the agency. She was the Republican governor of New Jersey, a state not known for its strong environmental record. She was a moderate, though, and found herself at odds with the administration on issues like climate change policy. Whitman resigned in 2003, citing family concerns. But in 2005, she published a memoir suggesting that meddling by former Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and Vice President Dick Cheney played a part. Utah Governor Michael Leavitt followed Whitman but was hardly a voice of dissent during his tenure. When Stephen Johnson was appointed administrator in 2005, many in the agency were excited, says Ruch. Johnson, at least, had a long career within the EPA. “He had a scientific background,” Ruch says. “They thought that he could restore self-respect to the agency.” But these days Johnson has been a regular visitor to congressional oversight committees as more evidence of industry interference comes out on issues ranging from chemical regulations to blocking California’s attempts to set its own, stronger vehicle emissions guidelines. During a May congressional hearing on White House influence at the agency, Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) called Johnson “essentially a figurehead.” On July 29, three senators called for Johnson to resign for supporting special interests. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) told reporters that Johnson “has become a secretive and dangerous ally of polluters.” The Environmental Fallout All of this has had huge implications on the ground. Patton suggests that the reluctance of the federal system to institute proper regulations has led states like California and Massachusetts to redouble their own environmental standards. But not all states are so proactive. John Blair is the director of Valley Watch, a group that monitors air and water pollution in the lower Ohio River Valley region, which has a large concentration of coal-fired power plants. He says that dealing with state environmental agencies in Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky is complicated by rushed permitting procedures and difficulty obtaining public records. These days, he goes straight to the source. “I’ve been seeking to deal with companies on an economic basis more than anything else,” Blair says. He’s busy persuading power companies not to build in the Valley, emphasizing prohibitive costs. And the EPA’s reluctance to regulate greenhouse gases and develop a comprehensive climate change policy is slowing environmental growth worldwide. Deborah Seligsohn, China director from the World Resource Institute, says that Chinese environmental bodies follow the lead of the U.S. on standards for air and water quality. “Were the U.S. to act, China will feel there is a commitment to actually solving the problem and be more interested in moving to the next level,” she writes in an e-mail. “[But], the fact is, China has a national climate change policy today. It is the U.S. that doesn’t.” Grifo is focused on moving forward. “It’s not that the EPA is fatally flawed,” she says. “It’s more like it has fallen and skinned its knee.” Says Ruch: “If you brought in somebody that believed in the mission and surrounded himself with others that believed in the mission, it would be like water in the desert. The desert flowers would bloom.” The EPA has been through rough patches before. During the Reagan administration, Anne Gorsuch ran the EPA into the ground with large budget cuts in both research and enforcement. When she resigned amid scandal, Reagan brought back William Ruckelshaus, known as “The Enforcer,” who had been the EPA’s inaugural administrator. Upon his return, Ruckelshaus wrote a memo to the staff telling them to operate as if they were in a fishbowl. Only then, he said, could the EPA regain the public trust. JORI LEWIS is an environmental writer and radio journalist.
CONTACTS Valley Watch Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Environmental Defense Fund Environmental Protection Agency |
