Tag Archives: conflict

Is Vladimir Putin Ready to Make a Deal?

Mother Jones

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

In his yearly press conference, Vladimir Putin appeared to be trying to cool down the rhetoric over Ukraine:

Mr. Putin recognized the efforts of President Petro O. Poroshenko of Ukraine in ending the conflict in the southeast of that country, but he suggested that others in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, may be trying to prolong the conflict….“We hear a lot of militant statements; I believe President Poroshenko is seeking a settlement, but there is a need for practical action,” Mr. Putin added. “There is a need to observe the Minsk agreements” calling for a cease-fire and a withdrawal of forces.

Russia has toned down its talk on the Ukraine crisis in the past month, and some of its most incendiary language, like “junta” and “Novorossiya,” a blanket term used for the separatist territories, is no longer used on state-run television news. Mr. Putin also notably omitted those terms, which he had used in other public appearances, on Thursday.

So does this mean Putin is adopting a more conciliatory attitude toward the West? You be the judge:

In general, he blamed “external factors, first and foremost” for creating Russia’s situation — accusing the West of intentionally trying to weaken Russia. “No matter what we do they are always against us,” Putin said, one of a series of observations directed at how he said the West has been treating Russia.

Putin attributed Western sanctions that have targeted Russia’s defense, oil and gas and banking sectors for about “25 percent” of Russia’s current difficulties.

But Putin stood firm over the actions that brought on the Western backlash, including Russia’s annexation of the Crimea peninsula after pro-Moscow rebels in eastern Ukraine began an uprising earlier this year….“Taking Texas from Mexico is fair, but whatever we are doing is not fair?” he said, in comments seemingly directed at the United States.

Putin also suggested that the West was demanding too many concessions from Russia, including further nuclear disarmament. Likening Russia to a bear — a longtime symbol of the country — he chided the West for insisting the Russian bear “just eat honey instead of hunting animals.”

“They are trying to chain the bear. And when they manage to chain the bear, they will take out his fangs and claws,” Putin said. “This is how nuclear deterrence is working at the moment.”

For what it’s worth, I’d say Putin is probably right about sanctions being responsible for around 25 percent of Russia’s economic problems. As for his guess that those problems will last two years before Russia returns to growth? That might not be far off either, though I suspect growth will be pretty slow for longer than that.

It’s hard to render a real judgment here without being fluent in Russian and watching the press conference in real time, but based on press reports I’d say Putin’s anti-Western comments were milder than they could have been. My guess is that events in Ukraine really haven’t worked out the way he hoped, and he’d be willing to go ahead and disengage if he could do so without admitting that he’s conceding anything. The anti-Western bluster is just part of that. (Of course, the bluster is also partly genuine: Putin really does believe, with some justification, that the West wants to hem in Russia.)

Oddly, then, I’d take all this as a mildly positive sign. The rhetoric seemed fairly pro forma; Putin obviously knows that sanctions are hurting him; and there were no serious provocations over Ukraine. I’ll bet there’s a deal to be made with Putin as long as it’s done quietly.

Visit site: 

Is Vladimir Putin Ready to Make a Deal?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is Vladimir Putin Ready to Make a Deal?

Conservative Lobby Group ALEC Plans Anti-Environmental Onslaught

Bills will reportedly aim to expand offshore oil drilling and cut EPA budget. wellesenterprises/Thinkstock The corporate lobbying network American Legislative Exchange Council, commonly known as Alec, is planning a new onslaught on a number of environmental protections next year when Republicans take control of Congress and a number of state legislatures. The battle lines of ALEC’s newest attack on environmental and climate measures will be formally unveiled on Wednesday, when the group begins three days of meetings in Washington DC. ALEC, described by its opponents as a corporate bill mill, has suffered an exodus of tech companies from its ranks recently because of its extreme positions – especially its promotion of climate denial. Read the rest at the Guardian. This article: Conservative Lobby Group ALEC Plans Anti-Environmental Onslaught

Link:

Conservative Lobby Group ALEC Plans Anti-Environmental Onslaught

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Conservative Lobby Group ALEC Plans Anti-Environmental Onslaught

Do Not Buy Oceanfront Property

Recent TV series about beach living are some of the most unreal reality shows. The aftermath of Superstorm Sandy on Long Beach Island, New Jersey. Clem Murray/The Philadelphia Inquirer/AP The Canadian couple on my television screen tours a small home on the north shore of the Dominican Republic. The couple, on HGTV’s Beachfront Bargain Hunt, are hoping to buy a vacation home for $300,000 or less—something in a secure neighborhood and with an ocean view. This home looks ideal, with a modern kitchen and infinity pool, the back gate just feet from the ocean. What’s never mentioned are the piles of sandbags sitting between the back fence and the high tide line. Does the house flood during storms? During exceptionally high tides? Is the ocean eating away at the land? Home and garden shows sells dreams, not reality. According to them, anyone can have that perfect kitchen with granite countertops, an open-plan first floor, a master bathroom bigger than most New York City apartments—or a home just steps from the ocean. The first three may empty your bank account, but the fourth is truly dangerous. Sea level is on the rise. What’s oceanfront this year could soon be sitting in the water. The beach is one of the most reckless places to invest in property. Read the rest at Slate. Follow this link:  Do Not Buy Oceanfront Property ; ;Related ArticlesWorld’s top PR companies rule out working with climate deniersWatch Drought Take Over the Entire State of California in One GIFWhy’s This Tea Party PAC Going After a Top Tea Partier? ;

Continue reading – 

Do Not Buy Oceanfront Property

Posted in alo, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, OXO, PUR, solar, solar panels, solar power, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Do Not Buy Oceanfront Property

This Huge Corporation Is Tackling Climate Change—Because It’s a Threat to the Bottom Line

green4us

Food giant General Mills now has some pretty sweet climate bragging rights. A few months ago, the international food manufacturing giant General Mills was branded a “clear laggard” by climate activists for not doing enough to cut its carbon footprint. Oxfam International accused the company of dragging its feet on reducing so-called “scope 3″ greenhouse gas emissions—those not directly controlled by the company, but essential in making its products; for example, emissions from a farm contracted by General Mills to grow the oats that eventually wind up in your cereal bowl. Oxfam also faulted the company for not using its clout to engage directly with governments to “positively influence climate change policy.” Oxfam calls General Mills “the first major food and beverage company to promise to implement long-term science-based targets to cut emissions.” General Mills’ worldwide sales total $17.9 billion, and it owns familiar consumer brands like Cheerios, Old El Paso, and Pillsbury. Today, Oxfam is claiming big victory: General Mills has released a new set of climate policies that Oxfam says makes it “the first major food and beverage company to promise to implement long-term science-based targets to cut emissions.” The policy states unequivocally that General Mills believes that climate change is a big threat to global food security and its future business model: Here are the key points of General Mills’ announcement: By August 2015, the company has promised to account for emissions across its entire operation and to set clear reduction targets. The company promises to reduce emissions with the goal of keeping the global temperature rise to less than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The company also aims to achieve “zero net deforestation” in “high-risk supply chains” by 2020. (This doesn’t necessarily mean “zero deforestation,” but rather that destroyed forests are replaced). General Mills says these high-risk supply chains include land that provides palm oil, packaging fiber, beef, soy, and sugarcane. The company will also now disclose its top three suppliers of palm oil and sugarcane. In another big step, the company also announced today that it will join BICEP—Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy)—”to advocate more closely with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation,” according to the company. The group of 31 companies (including big guns like eBay and Starbucks) is run by the non-profit Ceres, and is designed to help businesses directly lobby policymakers on issues like renewable energy, green transportation, and pollution controls on power plants. Ceres also campaigns to get companies and investors to adopt more sustainable environmental practices. Oxfam spokesman Grossman-Cohen believes that his group’s campaign helped motivate General Mills to make the changes. “It is in General Mills’ business interest to address climate change,” he wrote to me in an email. “But there’s no doubt that the public outcry helps ensure that the company’s efforts are as robust as they can be.”

View original:

This Huge Corporation Is Tackling Climate Change—Because It’s a Threat to the Bottom Line

Related Posts

These Breakfast Cereals Will Get a Lot More Expensive Thanks to Global Warming
Harsh Drought Is Drying Up New Mexico’s Largest Reservoir
How Climate Change Makes Wildfires Worse
Green Groups Stage Walk-Out at UN Climate Talks
Aims of Donor Are Shadowed by Past in Coal

Share this:

Read More: 

This Huge Corporation Is Tackling Climate Change—Because It’s a Threat to the Bottom Line

Posted in alo, Bragg, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Huge Corporation Is Tackling Climate Change—Because It’s a Threat to the Bottom Line

Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

Mother Jones

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

From John McCain this morning, speaking about the resurgent civil war in Iraq:

We had it won. Thanks to the surge and thanks to Gen. David Petraeus, we had it won….The fact is we had the conflict won, and we had a stable government, and a residual force such as we have left behind … but the president wanted out and now we are paying a very heavy price.

John McCain is now the Donald Sterling of foreign affairs: old, angry, retrograde, and only barely in touch with the real world. This is the same guy who declared Iraq safe after taking a carefully staged stroll through a fruit market in Baghdad seven years ago, and he hasn’t been willing to engage with reality any more seriously ever since. He’s just sure that we had it won, that American troops had victory in their grasp, and now it’s all turned to ashes. And since the actual politics of the region seem to be beyond him, all he can do is rage at President Obama for somehow ruining his lovely pretend victory.

It’s a little sad in a way, and perhaps sadder still that the media continues to give him the means to keep embarrassing himself on national TV. It’s time to move on, guys.

Excerpt from:  

Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Sterling, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: "We Had It Won….We Had It Won….We Had It Won."

As Earth Warms, West Nile Spreads

The virus took the U.S. by surprise. Thanks to climate change, it’s here to stay. Wikimedia Commons The day that everything changed was a broiling Thursday in July—95 degrees, the kind of dry heat that Sacramento Valley residents are used to. If you have to work outside, you do it before noon, swathed in long sleeves and pants to keep the sun at bay and the mosquitoes from eating you alive. On this day, however, my grandmother, an active and spritely woman even at 80, never made it outside to the garden. She mentioned at breakfast that she wasn’t feeling well, and my grandfather suggested that she take a nap in the sunroom. When he finally woke her up at 4 p.m., she still felt ill and feverish. The nearest emergency room is more than an hour’s drive from their 20-acre farm in rural northern California, but they decided to make the trip. The doctors performed a CAT scan, gave my grandmother some Tylenol, and sent her home. When my grandparents finally got back at around 11 p.m., my grandfather tried to convince my grandmother to eat something; she said that she could manage a piece of toast. A few days later he found the toast, one bite taken out of it, abandoned in the microwave. To keep reading, click here. View original: As Earth Warms, West Nile Spreads Related Articles7 Scary Facts About How Global Warming Is Scorching the United StatesThe Animals of ChernobylWATCH: These Reefs Are Beautiful—But Most of the Coral Is Dead

Link:  

As Earth Warms, West Nile Spreads

Posted in Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar panels, solar power, The Atlantic, TOTO, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on As Earth Warms, West Nile Spreads

Virginia Oil Tanker Derailment: “The River Was On Fire”

This is just the latest in a string of oil-by-rail accidents—and yet the feds are dragging their heels on safety rules. On Wednesday afternoon, a CSX train carrying crude oil jumped its tracks in downtown Lynchburg, Virginia, sending three tankers careening into the James River with a fiery load; it was the second derailment for the company this year. While no one was injured, the fire burned for hours, and more than 300 people were evacuated from the nearby area. ”The river was on fire,” deputy city manager Bonnie Svrek told The Washington Post. It’s still unclear how much of the missing 50,000 gallons of crude was burned and how much spilled into the river. The video footage above—shot from a drone—shows just how close the derailment was to both the town and the river. Meanwhile, this next Instagram video shows the intensity of the fire: This derailment is the latest in a series of fiery accidents involving oil tankers. According to the Association of American Railroads, the amount of crude oil traveling by rail skyrocketed from 9,500 carloads in 2008 to an estimated 400,000 in 2013. Our analysis published in February showed that in the United States, seven of the 10 worst railroad oil spills of the past decade happened in the last three years, totaling nearly $2 million in damages. (This number doesn’t include the catastrophic accident in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, last July, which decimated the town and killed 47 people.) US regulators have promised safer, more robust tanker cars in new regulations due out soon. Spurred by Lac-Megantic disaster, the Canadian Government last week issued tough new laws for the transportation of oil by rail, promising to retire older cars and replace them within three years, and making sure railways have emergency plans for responding to explosions. Yet—despite evidence that shows the older tank cars are more susceptible to rupture after a derailment—the United States lags behind Canada: Its proposed new rules have yet to be passed. As recently as mid-April, policy makers met in Washington to discuss the problem, showing videos of older cars rupturing during a puncture tests and spraying their contents, according to reports. Robert Fronczak of the Association of American Railroads told the meeting of the National Transportation Safety Board that eliminating them by attrition alone could take 40 to 50 years. Read this article: Virginia Oil Tanker Derailment: “The River Was On Fire” ; ;Related ArticlesSupreme Court’s Pollution Ruling “a Victory for Obama Administration’From Bundy To The Keystone XLIs Oil Money Turning the NRA Against Hunters? ;

Visit link: 

Virginia Oil Tanker Derailment: “The River Was On Fire”

Posted in alo, Anker, GE, ONA, OXO, PUR, Safer, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Virginia Oil Tanker Derailment: “The River Was On Fire”

El Niño Could Grow Into a Monster, New Data Show

A powerful El Niño could worsen droughts, intensify heat waves, and contribute to dangerous flooding. alika1712/Thinkstock The odds are increasing that an El Niño is in the works for 2014—and recent forecasts show it might be a big one. As we learned from Chris Farley, El Niños can boost the odds of extreme weather (droughts, typhoons, heat waves) across much of the planet. But the most important thing about El Niño is that it is predictable, sometimes six months to a year in advance. That’s an incredibly powerful tool, especially if you are one of the billions who live where El Niño tends to hit hardest—Asia and the Americas. If current forecasts stay on track, El Niño might end up being the biggest global weather story of 2014. Read the rest at Slate. Taken from:  El Niño Could Grow Into a Monster, New Data Show ; ;Related ArticlesFrame Climate Change as a Food Issue, Experts SayWATCH: Is This Man the Greenest Governor in America?To Fight Climate Change, the Entire World Will Have to Eat Less Meat ;

Original article: 

El Niño Could Grow Into a Monster, New Data Show

Posted in alo, Bunn, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, Mop, ONA, OXO, Pines, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on El Niño Could Grow Into a Monster, New Data Show

WATCH: Is This Man the Greenest Governor in America?

green4us

If Jay Inslee succeeds in his ambitious climate and energy goals, the impacts will extend far beyond Washington state. When Jay Inslee was elected governor of the state of Washington in November of 2012, climate campaigners rejoiced. As a congressman, Inslee had a top-tier environmental record, and not just that: He knew climate and clean energy issues inside-out. The co-author of the 2007 book entitled Apollo’s Fire: Igniting America’s Clean Energy Economy, he also worked closely on the 2009 passage of cap-and-trade legislation in the US House of Representatives and was a co-founder of the House’s Sustainable Energy Caucus. No wonder that upon his election in Washington, the League of Conservation Voters declared that Inslee was poised to become “the greenest governor in the country.” Sure enough, Inslee’s term got off to a great start: Last October, he joined the governors of Oregon and California and the Premier of British Columbia in endorsing the Pacific Coast Action Plan on Climate and Energy which pledges that those states (or, in BC’s case, that province) will set a consistent price or cap on carbon dioxide emissions (something California and British Columbia have already done), adopt low-carbon fuel standards, and more. But there’s just one problem: Shortly after Inslee’s election, two Democrats elected to caucus with the Republican minority in the Washington state senate, thus thwarting what otherwise would have been a Democratic majority in both houses. Instead of holding a 26-23 majority in the Senate, Democrats instead became a de facto 25-24 minority. And that razor-thin edge in the Washington state Senate is currently blocking Inslee from achieving many of his objectives. The partisan tension became apparent with Washington state’s Climate Legislative and Executive Workgroup, or CLEW, a bipartisan panel composed of two Republican and two Democratic legislators, along with Inslee as a non-voting member. Their task was to recommend a set of policies that would let Washington state adhere to greenhouse gas emissions goals that had been enacted in 2008: a reduction to 1990 emissions levels by 2020, then 25 percent below those levels by 2035, and finally, fifty percent below by 2050. The workgroup convened sessions and public deliberations around the state—but reached no bipartisan consensus. “We had over 900 citizens come out speaking overwhelmingly in favor of climate action, and close to 10,000 comments,” says Becky Kelley, deputy director of the Washington Environmental Council. “So, evidence that people really are calling for action.” Yet the Democrats and Republicans on the working group could not find common ground. They issued two separate reports, with the Democrats and Inslee endorsing strong climate action and the Republicans suggesting a variety of options, but not a central policy to cap greenhouse gas emissions, citing a “currently insufficient analysis of costs.” There has been more friction on the issue of a proposed low carbon fuel standard. In a January 2014 letter, Inslee charged Republican State Senator Curtis King, who co-chairs the Transportation Committee, with having misrepresented the governor’s policy goals by incorrectly labeling the standard a “tax.” In fact, the idea is to require a gradual reduction in the carbon content of fuels through a variety of means, ranging from blending in biofuels to encouraging more electric vehicles. “There is no element of a clean fuels standard that could in any way be called a ‘tax,’” wrote Inslee, later adding that a standard “would include cost containment measures to ensure that fuel prices are not significantly affected.” King responded by asking Inslee to “categorically deny” any intention to impose a fuel standard by executive action, in effect bypassing the legislature. King later charged that Inslee “refuses” to take this option off the table. And even as Inslee faces Republican resistance at home, his climate action partners may be growing a little impatient. British Columbians, for instance, have already put a price on carbon through a carbon tax, and are waiting for their southern ally to catch up to them. In the meantime, there are frequent charges that drivers who go across the border into Washington to gas up are partially undermining the tax’s effectiveness, and at least some evidence that this is happening, at least to a modest extent. All of which underscores that if Washington acts strongly on climate, the impact will extend far beyond Washington. For the state will be strengthening and reinforcing what California and British Columbia have already done, and the more these Pacific coast states are unified, the more the United States and even the world will have to take notice. “The sense is that if the west coast as a bloc acts, if we’ve got real climate policy from BC to Baja, that’s the world’s fifth largest economy,” says Kelly of the Washington Environmental Council. In the meantime, though, Inslee’s position within his state is much like that of President Barack Obama nationally, observes David Roberts of Grist magazine. “He wants to act, but he’s got no Republicans in the legislature on his side,” says Roberts, “so if he gets anything done, it’s going to be through executive powers.” So what happens next? Eric de Place, policy director of the Sightline Institute, a Seattle-based environmental think tank, thinks that if gridlock persists beyond 2014, there’s a chance that a citizen-led ballot initiative in Washington state could allow the public to vote directly on how to curb carbon emissions. Before, that, though, he thinks that Inslee may ultimately try to opt for a policy, like a carbon tax, that might be made palatable to state Republicans: The tax could be designed so that the revenue that it brings in would go towards other state budget shortfalls, such as in the transportation sector and in education. In his inaugural address as governor, Inslee declared that on leading the nation in green policy, “It is clear to me that we are the right state, at the right time, with the right people.” But now, that delicate balance may have shifted. “I’m certain the governor feels that not enough is getting done on climate action,” says Eric de Place of the Sightline Institute. The question is what Inslee plans to do about it. Image: Joe Mabel/Wikimedia Commons

See original article here: 

WATCH: Is This Man the Greenest Governor in America?

Related Posts

2 Former Premiers Try to Use Tokyo Election to Rally Public Against Nuclear Power
Climate Pact Is Signed by 3 States and a Partner
Which States Use the Most Green Energy?
How Science Can Predict Where You Stand on Keystone XL
California governor signs bill legalizing hemp farming in the state

Share this:

View article:  

WATCH: Is This Man the Greenest Governor in America?

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, green energy, Monterey, ONA, organic, Oster, OXO, PUR, solar, solar power, sustainable energy, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on WATCH: Is This Man the Greenest Governor in America?

Charts: How Dangerous Are the Gas Pipes Under Your City?

America’s aging gas network is big and getting bigger. Why that could be bad for you and the climate. Last week, a massive explosion leveled two five-story buildings on an East Harlem street in New York City, killing eight and injuring dozens more. Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board have yet to officially identify the cause of the disaster, but they appear to be focusing on a natural gas leak. They’ve isolated a crack in an 8-inch gas pipeline running next to one of the two apartment buildings, part of a system that is over 100 years old. If confirmed, this incident would be tied with a 2010 blast in San Bruno, CA., as the decade’s deadliest gas explosion. The Harlem tragedy is drawing national attention to the safety of America’s aging—and expanding—gas networks. Here’s what you need to know: What is natural gas? Natural gas is a fossil fuel largely comprised of methane, a colorless and highly combustible gas. In large enough quantities, or if ignited, methane can be explosive. Just how big is America’s natural gas system? The existing network—the labyrinth of pipes, big and small, that carry gas from well head to stove—is big, and getting bigger. There are more than 2.4 million miles of pipelines dedicated to carrying natural gas across the country. The vast majority of that—more than 80 percent—is made up of distribution lines, the small-gaugue pipes that deliver gas to your apartment, house or business for heating and cooking. The rest of the network is for gathering natural gas from its source and delivering it to refineries, and then transmitting it through larger pipes across long distances to the cities and power plants that need it. As domestic gas production soars to all-time highs—driven by the expansion of fracking—all that gas needs to be transported. That means more pipelines. The gas network has grown nearly 60 percent over the last 30 years, from 1.55 million miles to 2.45 million miles. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says 45 major gas projects with 1,723 new miles of pipelines are on the horizon. In the 10 years since 2004, 129 people have been killed and 533 injured. How dangerous is the gas network? Here are the basic numbers: In the 10 years since 2004, there have been 129 people killed and 533 injured in more than 2,660 major incidents on America’s gas network. Those accidents have cost a combined $2.4 billion in property damage, not including the cost of lost gas itself. But the network has become much safer over the years. The total annual number of pipeline incidents involving death or injury (including pipes that carry gas and those that carry hazardous liquids) has dropped by more than half from 1991-2010. Overall, major gas pipeline incidents have dropped 27 percent in the last 10 years. But deadly accidents still occur. Casting an even deeper look through the data, here are the deadliest incidents from the last three decades: Which cities have the most leaks? When counting total numbers of major leaks over 30 years, that title goes to Houston, which had 105 gas leaks serious enough to report to the federal agency in charge of pipeline safety. The numbers, compiled from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration data, include incidents across the entire labyrinthine national gas network, including distribution, gathering and long distance transmission lines. To qualify as significant enough to report, a leak must have caused death, serious injury or the significant loss of gas or property. Austin comes in second, followed by Phoenix and New York. At the state level, nearly one in every five major gas leaks happens in Texas, almost double the number that occur in second-placed Louisiana. With just over 3 percent of the nation’s major gas leaks, New York State is sixth. What do leaks mean for the climate? While energy production from natural gas is touted as a lower-emissions alternative to coal, gas leaks contribute significantly to global warming. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas. Unlike carbon dioxide, methane doesn’t last very long in the atmosphere. But pound-for-pound, it’s 21 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period. America’s natural gas system is the country’s biggest manmade source of these powerful methane emissions, and the fourth biggest source of carbon dioxide emissions, according to the EPA. Methane leaks are the low-hanging fruit of climate action: The World Resources Institute believes that ​fixing these leaks would be the single biggest step America can take toward meeting its long-term greenhouse gas reduction goals.​ A 2013 WRI study says natural gas producers allow $1.5 billion worth of methane to escape from their operations every year. In 2011, gas companies reported releasing 27.9 million metric tons of methane (when measured as an equivalent to CO2) into the atmosphere during the distribution stage, mostly from what’s known as “fugitive emissions”—or leaks—from pipelines. Old cast iron pipes are largely to blame, according to the EPA. Newer plastic pipes leak less. As they are installed more and more, there are fewer emissions; methane emissions from gas distribution have fallen 16 percent since 1990. What causes gas leaks? Catastrophic leaks like the one that apparently happened in East Harlem have at times been attributed to an aging gas network whose pipes can corrode and rupture. Leaks can also happen as a result of excavation or extreme weather, as was the case in the loss of New Orlean’s gas network after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Half of the nation’s pipes were constructed in the 1950s and 1960s during a post-war boom. The Department of Transportation says there are still around 36,000 miles of old cast iron pipes mainly concentrated in five states: New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Cast iron used in mains and service lines is four times more prone to serious leaks than other materials. The gas pipe into the destroyed buildings in East Harlem was partly made of cast iron and dated back to 1887. So, why don’t they just replace all the old pipes? Right now, a major problem is that companies don’t have incentive to replace the pipes, because they are allowed to pass on the costs of leaked gas to consumers, according to Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.). A report prepared by his office says that in 2012, gas companies replaced just 3 percent of their distribution mains made of cast iron or bare steel—another material that ruptures more easily than newer plastic models. At that rate, it will be many more decades before cities have a fully replaced system. It will be 2090, for example, before residents of New York state can enjoy that reality. In a sign that the rapid expansion of the country’s gas network hasn’t necessarily improved the existing infrastructure, the average age of the pipelines involved in accidents has continued to go up and up over the last 20 years: What are politicians doing about the problem? As the National Transportation Safety Board investigates the East Harlem explosion, local politicians are pushing to make New York’s system safer. “The human cost of inaction is clear,” New York City councilman Ydanis Rodriguez said after the explosion. “If the necessary funding for these repairs and improvements is not granted by the federal and state governments, tragic occurrences such as today’s may become more common in our city.” On the national level, Markey introduced bills last year intended to accelerate pipeline replacement programs. Those proposals, which remain stuck in committee, would cap the leakage costs that pipeline operators are allowed to pass on to consumers and would force operators to prioritize replacing older pipes. Congressional Republicans are focused on building more large-scale transmission pipelines. They want to speed up the permit process via the “Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act,” which passed the House last year. The White House has promised to veto the bill, saying it goes too far and lacks appropriate safeguards. For his part, President Obama made natural gas a centerpiece of his State of the Union address this year, promising to “act on my own to slash bureaucracy and streamline the permitting process for key projects.” The administration is also considering how to accelerate exports of natural gas. Which companies have the most leaks? Here’s a breakdown of the leakiest operators in the US in the past five years. Some of these companies, like Pacific Gas and Electric run the pipes that supply gas to your home, and then sell it to you. Others, like Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (owned by energy transportation giant Kinder Morgan), run massive interstate transmission lines. Interestingly, the list includes ANR Pipeline, which is was purchased in 2007 by TransCanada>—the prospective builder of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. ANR has reported 37 major leaks in the past five years, racking up over $11 million worth of property damages: Link: Charts: How Dangerous Are the Gas Pipes Under Your City? Related ArticlesAnother Firm That Evaluated Keystone For State Department Had Ties To TransCanadaA Map of History’s Biggest Greenhouse Gas PollutersAustralian Surfers Told To Expect Fewer Large Waves

View original post here: 

Charts: How Dangerous Are the Gas Pipes Under Your City?

Posted in alo, Bunn, Citadel, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Landmark, Monterey, ONA, OXO, PUR, Safer, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Charts: How Dangerous Are the Gas Pipes Under Your City?