Tag Archives: environmental

Watch history being made live at the DNC

Watch history being made live at the DNC | Grist

they’re with her

Watch history being made live at the DNC

By on Jul 26, 2016Share

Delegates are casting their votes, and Hillary Clinton is about to become the first female presidential nominee for a major political party. Watch below:

Intrepid Grist reporters Rebecca Leber and Ben Adler are in Philly covering the convention. Follow them on Twitter to stay on top of the environmental and climate news coming out of the DNC.

For our comprehensive election coverage, visit our Election Guide.

Election Guide ★ 2016Making America Green AgainOur experts weigh in on the real issues at stake in this electionGet Grist in your inbox
Also on Grist

Fast, Cool, Convenient

Don’t miss it: We’re talking sustainable cities in NYC this summer

Come to our hot summer lecture series, on a few of our favorite things: transportation, plastic, and keeping cool.

Walk It Out

The key to fighting climate change and mortality? Walkable cities

Watch how to make your city better for humans — not cars — to get around.

If you care about climate change, why aren’t you voting?

Well, Americans are bad at voting in general. Watch our video to find out why that’s a problem.

Editors’ Picks

Why eat meat when you can eat a veggie burger that bleeds?Oil industry supporters are getting ever more creative with their memesHow air-conditioning made America — and how it could break us allRecent Postsloading more stories…Bill Nye still has to take climate deniers to task, we guess

Watch the internet’s favorite bow tie-clad scientist debunk some common — and tired — conspiracy theories.


Flesh and blood

Why eat meat when you can eat a veggie burger that bleeds?

The plant-based burger is about to hop onto the menu at one of David Chang’s NYC restaurants.


Bad Internet

Oil industry supporters are getting ever more creative with their memes

Maybe don’t use “lesbians are hot” as an argument to support local oil extraction.


Trump: Scared of ISIS, loves air-conditioning, slams John Kerry

The link between climate change and terrorism remains elusive to the GOP nominee.


Hard row

Democrats say they want to support farmers, but what the heck does that mean?

Everyone wants to preserve family farms, but it’s easier said than done.


they’re with her

Watch history being made live at the DNC

The DNC live stream for your viewing pleasure.


around the world in 23 days

A solar-powered plane just flew around the world

The Solar Impulse powered through 24,500 miles, no fossil fuels needed.


Suckers

Are giant suction cups the key to cheap wind power?

Sometimes the future looks like a toilet plunger, and that’s OK.


It’s A Dry Heat … For Once

California’s not the only state in the middle of a scary drought right now

The Northeast is drying up like a piece of turkey jerky in the sun.

]]>

×


Continue reading here: 

Watch history being made live at the DNC

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch history being made live at the DNC

The “largest, dirtiest coal plant west of the Mississippi” announces major closures

Steam from the cooling towers of a coal power plant. REUTERS/Wolfgang Rattay

The “largest, dirtiest coal plant west of the Mississippi” announces major closures

By on Jul 13, 2016Share

Two coal-burning units that the Sierra Club calls “the largest, dirtiest coal plant west of the Mississippi” will close by 2022, according to a settlement reached between the coal plant’s operators and environmental groups. These closures, reports the Sierra Club, will reduce carbon emissions to the tune of 5 million tons per year, the equivalent of taking 1 million cars off the road.

The plant in Colstrip, Mont., has supplied energy across the state and the Pacific Northwest since the 1970s. While the soon-to-be-shuttered units were only intended to be used for 30 years, they’ve been in operation for closer to 40, even though older coal plants tend to lack modern air-pollution controls. In 2013, the Sierra Club and the Montana Environmental Information Center sued the plant’s owners, Talen Energy and Puget Sound Energy, for violating the Clean Air Act.

The Colstrip unit closures are the most recent in a rapid spate of coal plant closures fueled by environmental lawsuits against major polluters to keep fossil fuels in the ground. Green groups are finding creative ways to speed up the U.S.’s transition away from coal even before the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan kicks into gear.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit link: 

The “largest, dirtiest coal plant west of the Mississippi” announces major closures

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The “largest, dirtiest coal plant west of the Mississippi” announces major closures

Oakland says no thanks to coal exports

The coal shebang

Oakland says no thanks to coal exports

By on Jun 29, 2016Share

A proposal to turn a former Army base into a coal export terminal was thwarted Monday by a vote of the Oakland City Council. The terminal would have been the largest coal facility on the West Coast, exporting 10 million tons of coal from Utah each year.

The controversial plan pitted environmentalists, labor leaders, and politicians concerned about safety and greenhouse gas emissions against business interests and some residents who argued that the terminal would create jobs. Hundreds showed up to protest on both sides of the issue at the council meeting Monday, but the ban passed unanimously.

“I believe that ‘jobs versus the environment’ is a false choice,” said Councilman Abel Guillén.

“The transport and handling of coal would not only have had serious consequences for the health of local communities, but also for the health of San Francisco Bay,” said Sejal Choksi-Chugh, head of the environmental group San Francisco Baykeeper. “There is no good reason to bring coal into our vibrant and thriving economy and undo the years of progress that we’ve made in cleaning up the Bay.”

But the story is not over yet. A second city council vote will take place on July 9, and the developers have threatened to sue the city over its decision.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link to article: 

Oakland says no thanks to coal exports

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oakland says no thanks to coal exports

San Francisco Just Passed the Nation’s Toughest Ban on Styrofoam

Mother Jones

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

San Franciscans, bid adieu to Styrofoam. On Tuesday, the city unanimously passed an ordinance banning the sale of any product made from polystyrene, the petroleum-based compound that’s molded into disposable dishware, packing materials, and beach toys—among other things. Even though it’s commonly known as Styrofoam, that’s just a name-brand owned by the Dow Chemical Company.

It’s not SF’s first such restriction. In 2007, the city prohibited the use of polystyrene use in all to-go food containers. More than 100 cities, along with Washington, DC, now have similar laws in place. (The first Styrofoam ban was passed in 1988 by the city of Berkeley.) But San Francisco’s new ordinance, part of the city’s goal of “zero waste” by 2020, is the broadest yet. As of January 1, 2017, it will be unlawful to sell polystyrene packing materials (those infuriating foam peanuts, for instance), day-use coolers, trays used in meat and fish packaging, and even foam dock floats and mooring buoys.

Polystyrene’s story begins in the first half of the 20th century, but it didn’t become a staple of our everyday lives until the second half, when world production of plastic resins increased 25 fold. Before long, polystyrene was synonymous with take-out food, barbeque plates, and disposable coffee cups—Americans today still use an estimated 25 billion foam cups each year.

This week’s ban is a victory for environmentalists, who since the late 1970s have been up in arms over polystyrene’s impacts on marine life and waterways. (Recent evidence suggests the resins may be problematic for human health.) Polystyrene breaks down into tiny pieces, easily blown into the sea, where birds and fish often mistake them for food. The nonprofit Agalita Marine Research and Education found that about 44 percent of seabirds have ingested plastic, and 267 species of marine life are affected in various ways by plastic trash. (Witness photographer Chris Jordan’s devastating bird photos.)

While polystyrene is said to never completely break down in landfills, it actually can decompose in the oceans. The stuff eventually sinks, which makes it difficult to know how much of it exists. And polystyrene contributes to the horrifying notion that by 2050, we may have more plastics in the ocean than fish.

Critics of the new ban are quick to point out that polystyrene is recyclable—a judge actually overturned New York City’s ban on to-go containers last year, ruling that the city could make big money recycling the stuff. But while San Francisco residents can bring large pieces of polystyrene to a transfer station free of charge, it rarely gets recycled. The problem, says Robert Reed, a local project manager for Recology, a company that helps cities manage solid waste, is that few people bother to bring in their Styrofoam, and when they do, it’s usually not in good enough condition to be repurposed. (It can be melted down and used as trim or molding for building construction.) “The few buyers who exist demand that the material be very clean,” Reed says in an email. “They don’t even want dust on it.”

The American Chemistry Council, the trade group for chemical makers, opposed the city’s ban, arguing that polystyrene’s light weight results in less carbon emissions when products are transported. The group urged the city to consider the environmental costs of all packaging materials, as polystyrene will likely be replaced with compostable foams. “All packaging leaves an environmental footprint,” Tim Shestek, the council’s senior director, said in a statement.

“Compostables are not the silver bullet,” concedes Samantha Sommer, a project manager with Clean Water Action California, which aims to curb single-use products. Even compostable products, she says, “come from resources; it takes resources to produce, it produces energy and water emissions throughout its life cycle, and then becomes difficult to manage.”

But Styrofoam all the more so.

View article:

San Francisco Just Passed the Nation’s Toughest Ban on Styrofoam

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on San Francisco Just Passed the Nation’s Toughest Ban on Styrofoam

Wave goodbye to California’s last nuclear plant

nuclear’s unclear

Wave goodbye to California’s last nuclear plant

By on Jun 22, 2016Share

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

California’s biggest electric utility announced a plan on Tuesday to shut down the state’s last remaining nuclear power plant within the next decade. The plant, Diablo Canyon, has been controversial for decades and resurfaced in the news over the last few months as Pacific Gas & Electric approached a deadline to renew, or not, the plant’s operating license.

“California’s new energy policies will significantly reduce the need for Diablo Canyon’s electricity output,” PG&E said in a statement, pointing to the state’s massive gains in energy efficiency and renewable energy from solar and wind.

The most significant part of the plan is that it promises to replace Diablo Canyon with a “cost-effective, greenhouse gas-free portfolio of energy efficiency, renewables, and energy storage.” As I reported in February, some environmentalists were concerned that closing the plant could actually increase the state’s carbon footprint, if it were replaced by natural gas plants, as has happened elsewhere in the country when nuclear plants were shut down:

As the global campaign against climate change has gathered steam in recent years, old controversies surrounding nuclear energy have been re-ignited. For all their supposed faults — radioactive waste, links to the Cold War arms race, the specter of a catastrophic meltdown — nuclear plants have the benefit of producing huge amounts of electricity with zero greenhouse gas emissions…

A recent analysis by the International Energy Agency found that in order for the world to meet the global warming limit enshrined in the Paris climate agreement in December, nuclear’s share of global energy production will need to grow from around 11 percent in 2013 to 16 percent by 2030. (The share from coal, meanwhile, needs to shrink from 41 percent to 19 percent, and wind needs to grow from 3 percent to 11 percent.)

Michael Shellenberger, a leading voice in California’s pro-nuclear movement, estimated in February that closing Diablo Canyon “would not only shave off one-fifth of the state’s zero-carbon energy, but potentially increase the state’s emissions by an amount equivalent to putting 2 million cars on the road per year.” That estimate presupposed that the plant would be replaced by natural gas. The plan announced today — assuming it’s actually feasible — appears to remedy that concern. In a statement, Shellenberger’s group, Environmental Progress, said the plan is destined to “fail” because the notion that the plant can be replaced without increasing greenhouse gas emissions is “a big lie.”

In any case, the plant won’t be closing overnight. Over the next few years we should be able to watch an interesting case testing whether it’s possible to take nuclear power offline without worsening climate change.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Originally posted here: 

Wave goodbye to California’s last nuclear plant

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wave goodbye to California’s last nuclear plant

Republicans in Congress passed a law giving EPA more power

The Chemical Bothers

Republicans in Congress passed a law giving EPA more power

By on Jun 22, 2016 11:27 amShare

Congress has done something that’s practically unheard of. It handed the Environmental Protection Agency broad new powers. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama is signing the legislation into law.

In early June, the Senate passed a sweeping bill that revamps how federal regulators handle chemical safety, after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) lifted a last-minute hold on a vote. Because the House already passed the same reconciled version, the bill is headed to President Obama’s desk, where he is expected sign it into law.

Which means a Republican-controlled Congress managed to do something that no Congress since 1976 had been able to do: Overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act, a flawed, unenforceable law that gave the EPA just 90 days to study whether a new chemical was dangerous. It didn’t even allow the EPA to regulate asbestos-containing products, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in 1989.

The new bill means the EPA can finally evaluate cancer-linked substances like BPA and styrene used in plastics and formaldehyde found in fabrics and cars. It establishes uniform standards for evaluating about 20 chemicals at a time, and means more funding can be directed toward studying high-priority problem chemicals, especially those used near drinking water.

In extreme cases, the law might lead to a ban on certain chemicals. In others, it might mean more warning labels or limited use.

For a little perspective on just how great a task the EPA now has ahead, there are some 64,000 unregulated chemicals on the market.

No law, much less one coming from a conservative Congress, is perfect. And the industry won at least one key fight: States won’t be able to restrict or ban chemicals if they’re under review by the EPA. That’s why the Environmental Working Group opposed the bill, and why New York’s attorney general said he was disappointed in it. But most health and green groups accepted the compromise bill as an overall win.

This was a rare instance in which the manufacturers and chemical industries were on the same side as environmental and public health advocates: Everyone knew the current system was broken and needed to be fixed, and still it took many years to reach a compromise. Even the Senate’s resident science denier James Inhofe (R-Okla.) endorsed the bill.

But don’t expect to see this kind of cooperation on other public health issues, from lead-poisoned water to any of the threats posed by climate change. For that, we’ll need a very different Congress — and we can’t afford to wait another 40 years to get it.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Continue reading here:

Republicans in Congress passed a law giving EPA more power

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans in Congress passed a law giving EPA more power

The Rising Murder Count of Environmental Activists

A new report by Global Witness puts last year’s death toll at 185, a sharp increase, with Brazil leading the way. Continued:   The Rising Murder Count of Environmental Activists ; ; ;

Original post – 

The Rising Murder Count of Environmental Activists

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, horticulture, LAI, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Rising Murder Count of Environmental Activists

Conservatives try out bizarre energy attack ad

Conservatives try out bizarre energy attack ad

By on Jun 17, 2016 4:43 pmShare

Welcome to 2016, where “run, Jimmy, run!” is an actual line from an real-life, non-satirical campaign ad.

This week, the political arm of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce launched a new offensive against Pennsylvania Senate hopeful Kathleen McGinty, who is the Democratic nominee. The group, which is backing Republican incumbent Pat Toomey in the Senate race, blasted McGinty’s climate record in the inventive ad.

It features two mothers worrying McGinty will show up to zap their kids’ energetic playtime. “I can’t believe how much energy they have,” says one mom of the children. “Shhh … don’t say that,” says the other, adding, “Have you seen how Katie McGinty tries to tax energy?”

A child is seen running away by the end of the ad, leaving viewers baffled.

All this plays on old-school fears of cap and trade and a carbon tax in a state that has a pretty significant coal and gas industry. McGinty, former Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, is endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters and will go head-to-head against Toomey this November.

If this really is a preview of the new conservative attack line on climate, then we suggest running far, far away.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit site – 

Conservatives try out bizarre energy attack ad

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Conservatives try out bizarre energy attack ad

The Problem with Plastic Bag Alternatives

Plastic bags are a hot-button issue for environmentalists. Plastic bags are simply no good. In addition to the harmful chemical components of plastic, the material is responsible for a behemoth pile of waste, unappealing yet accurately named the Great Atlantic Garbage Patch, that stretches from the Virginia coast to Cuba, harboring 26 million plastic particles per square kilometer.

If this massive amount of plastic waste wasnt enough to turn you off from disposable bags, consider how they end up in our sewers, on trees and ingested by wildlife that mistake them for food.

All of those facts have to do with what happens to plastic after we use it. The single-use plastic bag has a very short usability span. According Environment Massachusetts, plastic bags are used for an average of about 12 seconds but they can take up to 1,000 years to degrade.

Finally, theres the environmental footprint of plastic bags. These stables of everyday American grocery shopping generate about 1 kg of carbon for every 5 bags used, according to Time for Change. Consider, then, that Americans use about 100 billion plastic bags per year. Thats 200 billion kgs of carbon per yearand were just talking about the United States.

Clearly, plastic bags need to go. But its not quite as simple as switching to paper or reusable bags, as Ben Adler argues in an article for Grist. Here are a few things we need to consider as we enact new policies to prevent against environmental degradation caused by plastic bags.

The Problem with Paper

Paper bags are often lauded as much better for the environment than plastic products. This is because paper is biodegradable and is therefore much less harmful to nature than plastic. A paper bag in the middle of the ocean is unlikely to cause any trouble to marine life or the composition of the ocean, as its made out of the same stuff as any natural plant.

However, as you probably suspected, deforestation isnt an issue to take lightly. We need the worlds forests direly. They offset carbon in the atmosphere, helping to curb climate change. They are also the homes of billions of species, which the planet requires for biodiversity.

Paper bags made from recycled materials are a great option in some ways, but not in others. In his article, Adler points out that paper bags, in fact, have a higher carbon footprint than plastic.

Very broadly, carbon footprints are proportional to mass of an object, David Tyler, a professor of chemistry at the University of Oregon, told Adler. For example, because paper bags take up so much more space, more trucks are needed to ship paper bags to a store than to ship plastic bags.

The Problem with Reusable Cotton

If youve ever shopped at supposedly environmentally conscious stores, youve probably been handed a complimentary green shopping bag at checkout (or been given the option to purchase one). Even aside from the idea of giving people goods that they wont necessarily use, this practice can be extremely wasteful.

Cotton isnt a miracle product. According to the World Wildlife Fund, cotton occupies just 2.4 percent of the worlds cropland, yet it makes up 11 percent of the global market for pesticides and 24 percent for insecticides.

The Best Solution

Because of these factors, many environmentalists believe that recycled plastic meant for reuse is the best alternative. Plastic that can withstand many uses and that isnt easily thrown away will cut down on waste while curbing carbon emissions and protecting forests.

The ideal city bag policy would probably involve charging for paper and plastic single-use bags, as New York City has decided to do, while giving out reusable recycled-plastic bags to those who need them, especially to low-income communities and seniors, Adler writes.

As for how citizens can best address the problem themselves, using reusable options is still your best bet. However, rather than purchasing cotton bags simply for grocery shopping, consider using a backpack or duffel bag you already own. No need to use resources for yet another bag when you probably have perfectly good ones lying around.

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

Link:  

The Problem with Plastic Bag Alternatives

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Problem with Plastic Bag Alternatives

We are fleeing the world’s coasts

We are fleeing the world’s coasts

By on Jun 10, 2016Share

As if beaches weren’t already scary (think: Shark attacks! Seagulls swooping in to snatch a sandwich from your hands! And [gulp] beach body season!), you may have heard that climate change is ushering in even greater terrors. We’re talking intense hurricanes, tidal flooding, and sea-level rise of three or four feet by 2100.

And people may already be responding to the planet’s not-so-subtle signals that coastal areas may not a safe place to live in the future. According to a new study from Environmental Research Letters, population growth patterns have indicated a slight distribution away from coastlines. The share of population that lives 124 miles from the coast has decreased slightly in recent years, from 52 percent in 1990 to 51 percent in 2010.

Wait! One percentage point may be a subtle change, but it’s likely contrary to what you’ve heard before, since there’s a common understanding that people are actually moving toward the coasts. And on a global scale, many more people live in coastal areas today than in the past — about five times as many as in 1900, Fast Company reports.

Humans have historically been drawn to coasts, and that’s for good reason. Life near the sea has a lot to offer: food, jobs, and the occasional orca sighting. But eventually, the coastally inclined might find themselves in a bit of a salty pickle if they don’t move further inland. The ocean is all too eager to move into beachfront properties and turn living rooms into giant aquariums.

Get Grist in your inbox

Original article – 

We are fleeing the world’s coasts

Posted in alo, Anchor, Casio, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on We are fleeing the world’s coasts