Tag Archives: agency

Republicans in Congress try to paperwork the EPA to death

by RoyalOShaughness Posted on April 15, 2016

Republicans in Congress try to paperwork the EPA to death

By on 15 Apr 2016commentsShare

In news that should surprise absolutely no one, an investigation shows the Republican-controlled Congress has it out for the Environmental Protection Agency. Its method: Annoying it to death.

Bloomberg BNA analyzed documents requests sent to the EPA and found that in just 2015, Congress sent the agency 884 letters requiring a response, 60 document requests, and one subpoena. In response, the EPA’s staff had to provide Congress with over 276,000 pages of documents.

All this paperwork impedes the EPA’s ability to do its job, according to Jeffrey Lubbers, a professor of administrative law at American University. Lubbers told Bloomberg BNA that the “EPA is probably one of the few agencies that gets this many. Because agencies have to take these requests very seriously, they have to spend a lot of time on them.”

The irony here is that after Congress flooded the EPA with requests, it criticized the agency for acting slowly. This isn’t entirely surprising from a Senate led by Mitch McConnell, who is currently urging states to refuse to work with the EPA on complying with President Obama’s Clean Power Plan. McConnell is hardly alone in his disregard for the EPA. “If [the EPA] actually acted in a responsible way, they wouldn’t get all these letters,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told Bloomberg BNA. “These letters are all generated by their irresponsible actions.”

As to what these “irresponsible actions” are, Barrasso didn’t say. Maybe he’ll request more documents to get to the bottom of it.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Source article: 

Republicans in Congress try to paperwork the EPA to death

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans in Congress try to paperwork the EPA to death

Sheldon Adelson’s Casino Agrees to Pay $9 Million in Foreign Corruption Case

by RachaelDawbin Posted on April 7, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The casino run by major GOP financier Sheldon Adelson agreed today to settle a long-running Securities and Exchange Commission bribery investigation that has been swirling around Adelson’s Chinese operations. Las Vegas Sands will pay $9 million but won’t have to admit any guilt, and the SEC will close its investigation into possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

In 2011, the Department of Justice and the SEC launched an investigation into Adelson’s company after a former executive accused the company of paying an intermediary to hide the company’s role in a variety of transactions, including transferring money to Chinese public officials. In the SEC press release on today’s settlement, the agency said Las Vegas Sands had failed to keep accurate records for more than $62 million in payments to an intermediary. According to the SEC, the money was given to the intermediary to buy a basketball team and arrange the purchase of a building from a Chinese state-run entity, for a “business center” that was never built.

According to the former Sands‘ executive, Steve Jacobs, who is now embroiled in a lengthy court fight with Adelson over his firing several years ago, the intermediary was a man named Yang Saixin, who was helping to organize the Adelson Center for US-China Enterprise in Beijing. Yang has denied any wrongdoing, but an internal Sands memo described him as influential and said his parents “knew President Xi Jinping’s parents, implying a strong connection to Zhongnanhai (the White House of China).” Adelson himself has denied any knowledge of plans for the center.

While the SEC settlement does not make it clear what the true purpose of the spending was, it does show that Adelson’s Chinese operations handed an enormous amount of money over to the intermediary. That intermediary was referred to in Sands internal documents as a “beard,” the SEC announcement said. The payments cited by the SEC today included:

$6 million for the purchase of a Chinese basketball team. The “beard” was used for the purchase because gaming companies aren’t allowed to own basketball teams in China. An additional $8 million was paid to Yang for team operating costs, but no documentation for those costs exists, the SEC found.
$43 million in payments to Yang for the purchase and management of a building, once owned by a Chinese state entity, in order to build the business center. Las Vegas Sands employees were concerned that the payments were “solely for political purposes,” the SEC release said, but there was no documentation or research on the costs associated with the payments whatsoever. Included in the payments were $900,000 for property management costs, when no property management work was ever done, and $1.2 million for “arts and crafts.”

In addition to paying the $9 million fine, Adelson’s company agreed to hire an independent consultant to monitor its internal finances for two years.

In its own statement, Las Vegas Sands downplayed Jacobs’ role in launching the investigation, and quoted Adelson as saying he was “pleased to have the matter resolved…We will build on this experience, which has reemphasized to our 50,000 team members worldwide the same values I have made the foundation of my seven decades in business—integrity and reputation matter.”

Taken from: 

Sheldon Adelson’s Casino Agrees to Pay $9 Million in Foreign Corruption Case

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sheldon Adelson’s Casino Agrees to Pay $9 Million in Foreign Corruption Case

21 countries shrank their carbon pollution while growing their economies

by RolandoEstell8 Posted on April 5, 2016

21 countries shrank their carbon pollution while growing their economies

By on 5 Apr 2016commentsShare

There’s some handwringing even among skeptics who accept climate change is real and human-made that rising greenhouse gas emissions is the inevitable product of a growing economy. And for years, that was pretty much the case: The only time a country saw emissions dip was in an economic recession.

But that doesn’t look to be the case any longer, particularly for industrialized nations. A new analysis from the World Resources Institute (WRI), based on data from BP and the World Bank, finds 21 countries have cut greenhouse gas emissions since 2000 but have seen their economy grow all the same. That includes the United States:

World Resources Institute

The WRI analysis lends further support to a trend at the global level of decoupling emissions from economic growth. Last month, the International Energy Agency (IEA) announced that energy-related emissions stayed flat in 2015 for the second year in a row, while global GDP had continued to grow at about 3 percent. In the U.S. alone, there was a 6 percent drop in energy-related carbon emissions and a 4 percent increase in GDP from 2010 to 2012.

It will be hard to deny this decoupling of growth and emissions, but science deniers always find a way.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link:

21 countries shrank their carbon pollution while growing their economies

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 21 countries shrank their carbon pollution while growing their economies

Tech-Shuttle Giant Given the Boot in San Francisco

by RodgerZTDg Posted on April 1, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Citing a history of disregard for traffic laws and acrimonious labor disputes, San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency has declined to grant tech shuttle operator Bauer’s IT a permit to use public bus stops under the city’s controversial Commuter Shuttle Program. Bauer’s IT is one of San Francisco’s largest tech bus operators, accounting for 10 percent of the city’s commuter shuttle pickups. Bauer’s IT clients include major Bay Area tech companies such as Twitter, Yelp, Salesforce, and Cisco.

According to a “notice of permit denial” sent from the SFMTA to Bauer’s yesterday, the company repeatedly broke the law by sending large buses down “weight-restricted streets” and stopping at locations not designated for private buses. It also failed to inform the city of ongoing labor disputes with the International Brotherhood of the Teamsters, whose complaints of illegal union busting practices at the company are being heard by the National Labor Relations Board. The Commuter Shuttle Program requires participating companies to maintain “labor harmony.”

In 2013, tech shuttles, a.k.a. “Google buses,” became potent symbols of inequality and gentrification in the Bay Area after it emerged that the posh private vehicles were illegally using public bus stops to pick up workers. The following year, the city launched a pilot program that allowed the companies to use the stops legally for a nominal fee. That program becomes permanent next month, but requires participating companies to reapply for permits. Bauer’s IT could not be reached for comment.

“The SFMTA is enforcing what the City and County of San Francisco is famous for: Recognizing employees’ right to be represented and right to and fair wages and benefits,” said Rome Aloise, the director of Teamsters Joint Council 7, which represents drivers in Northern California. “Bauer’s seems to be just disregarding all of that.”

Does this mean the Twitterati will be tweeting from BART like the rest of us? Not exactly. Bauer’s IT has 15 days to file an appeal, and can then continue to use its stops until the city makes a final decision.

View the original here:

Tech-Shuttle Giant Given the Boot in San Francisco

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tech-Shuttle Giant Given the Boot in San Francisco

Mitch McConnell likes procrastinating so much, he wants the whole country to do it

by AdrianneBeaudoin Posted on March 23, 2016

Mitch McConnell likes procrastinating so much, he wants the whole country to do it

By on 23 Mar 2016 11:04 amcommentsShare

The most powerful man in the Senate isn’t interested in doing his job, and he’s telling state leaders around the country: Why should you do yours?

That man would be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, whose steadfast refusal to consider a Supreme Court nominee until after the election gives new meaning to the word “dillydally.” Now the Kentucky Republican, in a letter published Monday to state governors, is also urging procrastination on another important issue: climate change.

McConnell is referring specifically to the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, which requires states to submit plans for curbing carbon pollution from power plants an average of 32 percent by 2030. It’s the centerpiece of President Obama’s climate-fighting agenda, and McConnell has been urging states to drag their heels since the EPA issued the rule a year ago, when he told them to  “just say no.”  McConnell argued that states should refuse to submit a carbon-cutting plan to the EPA as a means of protest, even though legal experts dismissed his reasoning.

Advertisement – Article continues below

Now McConnell is emboldened by the Supreme Court’s unexpected decision in February to stay the Clean Power Plan while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decides the case. If the courts do uphold the rule, McConnell insists there is no risk for states to stop planning for implementation. “[E]ven if the CPP is ultimately upheld,” he writes to governors, “the clock would start over and your states would have ample time to formulate and submit a plan; but if the court overturns the CPP as I predict, your citizens would not be left with unnecessary economic harm.”

Legal scholars say McConnell is once again giving terrible advice. “No one knows how it’s going to play out” in the courts, New York University Institute for Policy Integrity Senior Attorney Jack Lienke (and sometime Grist contributor) told me. “All we know is the rule is stayed until this litigation is resolved, and we don’t know exactly how it’s going to be resolved.”

There’s no reason for states to assume that if they stop their work now, the “clock would start over” and their time to implement the Clean Power Plan would be extended if the rule is upheld, Lienke said. The courts could do any number of things, as could the EPA. “It is bad advice to suggest they should count on that happening. The Supreme Court orders granting the stay didn’t say anything about holding up deadlines.”

Since the Supreme Court’s stay was issued last month, 19 states have kept working toward the Clean Power Plan regs, while 19 states have halted their efforts (four states are exempt because they have so few coal-fired power plants sector). McConnell’s letter is meant to help sway the nine states still debating what to do into the procrastinator’s column.

Ironically, his advice could wind up hurting the coal-reliant states (like his home state of Kentucky) that need extra time to begin a clean-energy transition. Foot dragging might be McConnell’s speciality, but it’s no good for anything but his political machinations.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

More: 

Mitch McConnell likes procrastinating so much, he wants the whole country to do it

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mitch McConnell likes procrastinating so much, he wants the whole country to do it

Apple says you can “feel really good” about buying its products. Don’t believe them.

by Brook30Mlem Posted on March 22, 2016

Apple says you can “feel really good” about buying its products. Don’t believe them.

By on 22 Mar 2016 3:24 pmcommentsShare

Lisa Jackson, Apple’s VP of environment, policy, and social initiatives, took to the stage at a press event Monday to discuss the company’s new environmental commitments. And from what Jackson, an ex-Environmental Protection Agency administrator, said, Apple’s doing pretty damn well. The details:

93 percent of Apple operations worldwide are powered by renewable energy
In 23 countries, including the United States and China, operations run on 100 percent renewables
99 percent of Apple packaging is recycled or sourced from sustainably managed forests
Apple is funding the preservation of a million acres of forest in China and 35,000 acres in the eastern U.S.

According to Jackson, this means that “every time you send an iMessage or make a FaceTime video call or ask Siri a question, you can feel really good about reducing your impact on the environment.” You can almost hear Steve Jobs patting himself on the back from the great Apple Store in the sky on the brand going green. But how much good is Apple really doing? Sure, 93 percent renewables is about 93 percent better than most giant corporations, but Apple puts a whole lot of crap into the world that we don’t really need. It’s called planned obsolescence, and it means that the constant release of new products makes your iPhone seem as unwieldy and slow-moving as a landline after a couple of years.

That’s the real problem here: It doesn’t matter how much Apple recycles or how many acres they save if they keep dumping new products into the market, as Andrew Freedman wrote for Mashable, “By constantly rolling out new products and encouraging consumers to trade in their not-so-old phones for new, upgraded ones, Apple is contributing to a consumerism that may be difficult to ever neutralize from a carbon standpoint.” Apple may construct their products in factories powered by the sun, as Freedman points out, what happens from there is hardly green: They ship these products from factories in China on planes and charged in places where coal powers the grid.

And the customer may use the phone for a shorter period of time than they might have used it otherwise. The company is promoting Apple Renew, a recycling program that lets you exchange your old device for an Apple gift card, but 70 percent of e-waste is likely to end up in landfills, anyway.

Apple events like the one on Monday convince many people that they have to be early adopters and get the latest and greatest gadget on the market. Clearly, the problem isn’t just Apple: It’s also us. We want the iPhone 10, we want the sharpest cameras and the newest apps and the phone that pets your head and holds your hand in the night. But we do need it? Hardly. In fact, research shows that consumerism actually makes us less happy, not more.

What you can feel good about is deciding to not upgrade your phone.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Read article here: 

Apple says you can “feel really good” about buying its products. Don’t believe them.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Apple says you can “feel really good” about buying its products. Don’t believe them.

Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

by BYUSamira6 Posted on March 13, 2016

One of the hottest issues in any presidential race usually has to do with the Supreme Court, the highest court in the U.S. The 9 justices who sit on the court hold the fate of the nation in their hands. They decide lawsuits, interpret the Constitution and can change the way society is forced to behave, simply by reaching a majority decision on a case that’s brought before them.

The President nominates justices, and the U.S. Senate votes them in or out. Once appointed, a Supreme Court justice serves a life term that ends only when the justice dies or voluntarily resigns. Because a justice can stay on the court for 30 or 40 years, many people believe that of the thousands ofdecisions a president makes during his or her tenure, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is among the most important.

Supreme Court decisions have determined whether and how the environment is protected for many decades. Here is a sample of some important decisions the court has made regarding the planet.

Endangered Species – Antonin Scalia, who recently died after 30 years as a justice, led the court’s conservative wing on limiting environmental groups’ ability to sue corporate polluters, protect public land and enforce federal water regulations.

Environmentalists use lawsuits to force polluters to obey state and federal laws on such issues as releasing toxic chemicals into the air or waterways or to protect endangered species. Scalia’s 1992 opinion in

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife

determined that Defenders (ergo, other environmental organizations) did not have “standing” to challenge endangered species protections. In other words, the Court essentially decided, in an

opinion written by Scalia

, that industry attempts to blockthe Endangered Species Act should be taken more seriously than environmental groups’ efforts to enforce it.

Clean Power Plan

– President Obama and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have issued a rule requiring states to develop plans to lower carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. The

CPP

is an attempt to reduce greenhouse gases that cause climate change as well as limit soot and other fine particles that contribute to air pollution.

The current court has

blocked

the government’s ability to implement the plan because opponents have filed a lawsuit in the D.C. Circuit Court, which will hear arguments about the law pros and cons June 2. If the D.C. Circuit Court upholds the constitutionality of the plan, opponents could stillappeal to the Supreme Court, which could decide the plan is unconstitutional. The fate of the Clean Power Plan remains to be seen.

Mercury Pollution – Coal and oil-fired power plants emit mercury and other air pollutants. In fact, coal plants are the largest single source of mercury in our environment.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued a federal rule aimed at reducing mercury emissions. That

rule was challenged

by twenty states that wanted the court to block the rule while the government decided how to calculate the cost of implementing it.

In a good move for the planet, Chief Justice John Roberts turned down their request and let the rule stay in effect while the costs are determined.

Citizens United

– In 2010, the Supreme Court decided in the

Citizens United Case

that corporations and labor unions can contribute unlimited amounts of money to candidates running for office. The Court also essentially gave permission to polluters todonate huge sums to sitting legislatorsin the hopes of influencing the votes they cast on new laws to protect the environment.

Here is one example of how Citizens United has played out. Richmond, California in the San Francisco Bay Area is the home of a Chevron oil refinery. Prior to Citizens United, perhaps around $100,000 would have been spent on local political races there. But in 2012, reports

Garnet Goes Green,

political action committees empowered by Citizens United poured $4 million into the races for three seats on the Richmond City Council. Of that, $2 million was contributed by Chevron.

Results? Two of Chevron’s three preferred candidates won their races in that year’s election.

Citizens United reaches far beyond the environment. The

U.S. Library of Medicine

, a division of the National Institutes of Health, has found that “corporations can now make unlimited contributions to election advocacy advertising…Candidates who favor public health positions may be subjected to corporate opposition advertising.” In other words, polluters can spend a fortune trying to defeat a candidate who wants to clean up the air or water or reduce the presence of toxic chemicals in everyday products.

“The ruling expands corporate rights to disproportionately influence the electoral process and thus health policymakers,” notes the National Library of Medicine. “The effects on public health may be catastrophic. For example, corporations could spend unlimited sums for advertising against candidates who support public health positions on issues such as taxation on sugar-sweetened drinks, air quality standards or access to reproductive services.”

The environment always seems to be under attack. Often, our only recourse is to sue to invoke protections afforded the planet by suchlaws as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act or

NEPA

, the National Environmental Policy Act.

The buck stops with the Supreme Court. However justices interpret the law, whether to protect the environment or protect the polluters, will reverberate across the planet for decades to come. The Supreme Court can be our last best hopeor our worst one.

Related

What Pres. Obama’s Clean Power Plan Actually MeansSupreme Court Overturns California Ban on Slaughtering Downed Animals

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Visit link – 

Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Does the Supreme Court Matter to Environmentalists?

Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

by GregOneill Posted on March 8, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story was originally published in ProPublica.

Seven and a half years ago, as a new reporter at ProPublica, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all reports of misconduct by federal air marshals.

It had been several years since the U.S. government rapidly expanded its force of undercover agents trained to intervene in hijackings after 9/11. And a source within the agency told me that a number of air marshals had recently been arrested or gotten in trouble for hiring prostitutes on missions overseas.

I knew the FOIA request would take a while—perhaps a few months—but I figured I’d have the records in times for my first ProPublica project.

Instead, I heard nothing but crickets from the Transportation Security Administration.

Finally, last Wednesday, an email popped into my inbox with the data I had been fighting for since my fourth day at ProPublica.

The saga to get the air marshal data reveals a lot about the problems with FOIA, which is supposed to guarantee the public’s access to government records, as well as what happens when an agency decides to drag out the process.

Even though the Federal Air Marshal Service insists it has taken steps to build an agency steeped in professionalism with no tolerance for misconduct, it continues to face the same issues it was battling when I filed my FOIA request in 2008.

While waiting for the data, I found dozens of air marshals who had been arrested for crimes ranging from aiding a human trafficking ring to attempted murder. One air marshal used his badge to smuggle drugs past airport security while another used his to lure a young boy to his hotel room, where he sexually abused him.

Air marshals had hired prostitutes in Barcelona and gotten into a fight with security guards after patronizing a brothel in Frankfurt.

Another marshal’s in-air behavior concerned flight attendants so much that they reported it to the agency, saying “I can’t believe he is able to carry a gun!” (That officer was later convicted of bank fraud for trying to cash a $10.9 million check that he said was a settlement after he was a scratched by a friend’s cat.)

As time passed, the problems continued.

Last year, several other news outlets published troubling reports about air marshals that sound remarkably similar. A few selections: Air marshals accused of hiring prostitutes in Europe and recording the sex on their phones. Air marshals describe a “party-hearty” atmosphere. Air marshal kicked off plane after throwing a fit when he was offered only one dinner choice instead of three.

Oddly, when the TSA finally responded to my seven-year-old request, it included its own analysis of the data along with an unsolicited statement.

“The vast majority of FAMs federal air marshals are dedicated law enforcement professionals who conduct themselves in an exemplary manner,” it said. “TSA and FAMS continually strive to maintain a culture of accountability within its workforce.”

The statement also said the agency saw a “significant reduction” in misconduct cases in 2015 as a result of its initiatives. But notably, the agency only provided data through February 2012, even though in my last email exchange with the office last month I requested the entire database.

This has become standard practice for many agencies. By delaying FOIA requests for years, the TSA gets to claim the data it releases is old news. (The agency made the same claim back in 2008, which—because of the data we received recently—we now know wasn’t true.)

So what did the data tell us about misconduct by air marshals?

For starters, air marshals were arrested 148 times from November 2002 through February 2012. There were another 58 instances of “criminal conduct.”

In addition, air marshals engaged in more than 5,000 less serious incidents of misconduct, ranging from 1,200 cases of lost equipment to missing 950 flights they were supposed to protect.

Is that a lot or a little? It’s hard to say because the number of air marshals is classified and the estimates of the size of the force don’t include turnover.

The TSA says the misconduct represents just a “handful of employees.” But concerned air marshals I spoke with said they should all show sound judgment, given that air marshals are allowed to carry guns on planes and must make split-second life-and-death decisions.

Some other highlights found in our analysis of the data:

250 air marshals have been terminated for misconduct; another 400 resigned or retired while facing investigation.
Air marshals have been suspended more than 900 times, resulting in more than 4,600 days lost to misconduct.
The Washington field office had the most incidents with 530 cases, followed by New York with 471, Chicago and Dallas with 373 each and Los Angeles with 363. There were 85 cases at air marshal headquarters, highlighting that in some cases, misconduct has extended to the top brass.

After our story ran in late 2008, Robert Bray, the director of the air marshal service at the time, vowed to create a “culture of accountability” within the agency and raised the penalty for drunk driving arrests to a 30-day suspension.

We now know the number of misconduct cases remained fairly steady, about 600 a year, in the years before and after our investigation.

It’s unclear if the agency got tougher or weaker. Before the story ran, only 4 percent of air marshals who had been arrested received a suspension of 14 days or longer. After the story ran, that number jumped to 20 percent. But at the same time, a much higher percentage of arrested air marshals got off with minor discipline such as a letter of reprimand, a warning or no action at all.

After the story, I continued to talk to air marshals and pursue the FOIA request. Inspired by the Obama administration’s memo on transparency, and armed with new information that there was a specific misconduct database, I filed a second FOIA request in 2010.

This was perhaps a mistake. Rather than respond to my first request, the TSA merged it with my new request.

In 2012, the agency responded. But the TSA only released two columns —one showing allegations against air marshals, the other listing disciplinary actions taken in response. Notably, there were no dates, which would have allowed us to check if the agency’s “culture of accountability” was working.

I immediately appealed. In addition, I filed another FOIA request for the entire database—”all columns and rows.”

Two more years passed. Meanwhile, air marshal director Bray himself became embroiled in a misconduct investigation. A supervisor was accused of obtaining free and discounted guns from the air marshals’ weapons supplier and providing them to top officials, including Bray, for their personal use. In 2014, Bray retired.

Around that time, I partially won my appeal. But the data was still incomplete.

After nearly six years, I had pretty much given up.

Until late December. That’s when an email arrived from TSA telling me my request from 2012 had been sitting in a backlog and wanting to know if I was still interested.

Indeed I was. (The TSA had asked me this question a few times during my pursuit of these records.)

A month later, I had the information I had been seeking. It only took seven years, seven months and 29 days.

Link:

Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, PUR, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

by KoryE15urb Posted on March 1, 2016

What happens when electronics come to the end of their useful life? For the vast majority of these devices, they either collect dust somewhere in our homes or offices or get sent to the landfill.According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, only12.5 percentofelectronic waste,or e-waste, is recycled in the U.S.

Bloombergrecently dug intoApples e-wasteproblemnamely the fate of the more than 570 million smartphonesthat have been sold since the first generation iPhone debuted in Jan. 9, 2007and found that the tech giant has collected more than 40,000 tons of e-waste in 2014, recovering enough steel to lay 100 miles of railway track.

Apple has sold 570 million iPhones in the past 9 years. What happens to these phones when they reach the end of the road? Photo credit:Flickr

Its clear that our increasingly digital world has left ashocking impact on our planet. These gadgetsrequire amassive amount of energyto manufacture and its potentially hazardouscomponents can havea toxic and evendeadlyimprint on planetary inhabitants.

With agrowing number of smartphones, computers andtablets piling up in our drawers or the landfill, United Nations officialsestimatedthat the volume of e-waste generated worldwide is expected to climb by 33 percent by 2017 to 65 million tons.

Apple will have to face thismounting e-wastecatastrophe as each

new product

comes along. However, asLisa Jackson, Apples vice president of environment, policy and social initiatives told Bloomberg,Apple has led theindustry in recycling efforts:

In the electronics recycling business, the benchmark is to try to collect and recycle 70 percent, by weight, of the devices produced seven years earlier. Jackson says Apple exceeds that, typically reaching 85 percent, including recycling some non-Apple products that customers bring in.

That means it will have to get hold of and destroy the equivalent of more than 9 million of 2009s iPhone 3GS models this year around the world. With iPhone sales climbing to 155 million units last fiscal year, grinding up Apple products is a growth business.

Apple has afree reuse and recycling programthat allows users to turn in their old iPhones, iPads or computers (Mac or PC) for Apple gift cards if the device qualifies for reuse. If it doesnt qualify for reuse, Apple will recycle it at no cost to the consumer.

Apple works with the Hong Kong-based electronics recycler Li Tong Group that follows a strict and secretivemulti-stepprocess that consists of breaking down every single element of an old phone and capturing 100 percent of thechemicals and gasses thats released during the process, Bloomberg reported.

Jackson saidthat the never-endingbuildup of new tech gear is a global issue.

Theres an e-waste problem in the world, JacksontoldBloomberg. If we really want to leave the world better than we found it, we have to invest in ways to go further than what happens now.

Jackson, who once headedthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agecny, has achieveda number of green initiatives since she was tapped to take charge ofApples environmental affairs in 2013. Frombanning a number oftoxicchemicalsfrom their products tooverseeingthe companys $1.5 billion green bond,the largest such bond from a U.S. business.

Apple has banned these chemicals in their products out of concern for the environment. Photo credit: Apple

The Cupertino, California-based company is currently running its entire nation-wide operation on 100 percent renewable energy and has committed to running its overseas supply chain on renewables as well.

I think people expect it of us. I think our customers hold us to a high standard, Jackson told Bloomberg.

Apple CEO Tim Cook is a big believer in big businessestaking charge on environmental sustainability.

The environment must also be on the business agenda, hesaidin a speech at Bocconi University in Italy in November.

As business leaders, we have a responsibility to address this, and urgently, he continued. We have obligations to our companies and our shareholders becauseclimate changeimpacts supply chains, energy crises and overall economic stability.

Written by Lorraine Chow. Reposted with permission from EcoWatch.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

See the original article here:

Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

The Supreme Court Just Dealt a Huge Blow to Obama’s Climate Plan

by EugenioOIBS Posted on February 10, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a setback for the Obama administration, the Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily halted enforcement of Obama’s signature climate initiative.

The Clean Power Plan, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency last summer, requires states to limit coal-fired power plant emissions—the nation’s largest source of greenhouse gases—by a third by 2030. The regulation was expected to revamp the energy industry in the coming decades, shutting down coal-fired plants and speeding up renewable energy production. But 29 states, together with dozens of industry groups, sued the EPA, claiming the rule was “the most far-reaching and burdensome rule the EPA has ever forced onto the states.”

In a 5-4 vote today, the Supreme Court issued an unusual, one-page emergency order for the EPA to put the plan on hold until the US Court of Appeals, which will hear the case this summer, comes to a decision. While the hold is temporary, many see the order as a sign that the Supreme Court has concerns about the policy.

Read more:  

The Supreme Court Just Dealt a Huge Blow to Obama’s Climate Plan

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, green energy, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Just Dealt a Huge Blow to Obama’s Climate Plan