View this article –
Tag Archives: Gas
As historic rainfall and flooding continue to pound America’s fourth-most populated city, residents of Houston’s industrial fence-line communities are reporting strong gas and chemical-like smells coming from the many refineries and chemical plants nearby. “I’ve been smelling them all night and off and on this morning,” said Bryan Parras, an activist at the grassroots environmental justice group TEJAS. Parras, who lives and works in Houston’s East End, on Sunday said some residents are experiencing “headaches, sore throat, scratchy throat and itchy eyes.”
Parras said there are chemical smells in the air all over the East End, but particularly in communities adjacent to Houston’s sweeping petrochemical industry. And residents can’t escape the smell, because flood waters have overtaken the city, and could reach over four feet in some spots. “Fenceline communities can’t leave or evacuate so they are literally getting gassed by these chemicals,” Parras said.
Some Twitter users in Houston also reported concerns about air quality.
It’s still unclear exactly where the smells are coming from, but Parras suspects the source is the many oil refineries, chemical plants, and gas facilities nearby. Several of these plants have shut down or are in the process of shutting down due to Harvey’s historic flooding, and shutdowns are a major cause of “abnormal” emission events, according to a 2012 report from the Environmental Integrity Project. Short-term impacts of these events can be “substantial,” because “upsets or sudden shutdowns can release large plumes of sulfur dioxide or toxic chemicals in just a few hours, exposing downwind communities to peak levels of pollution that are much more likely to trigger asthma attacks and other respiratory systems.” The communities closest to these sites in Houston are disproportionately low-income and minority.
There are huge public health risks from pollution releases during any hurricane, but the risk is particularly high with Harvey. The plants in the area hit directly by the storm “are responsible for roughly 25 percent of the United States’s petroleum refining, more than 44 percent of its ethylene production, 40 percent of its specialty chemical feed stock and more than half of its jet fuel,” according to the New York Times.
On Sunday, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke — fresh off a bizarrely off-topic mid-hurricane Twitter endorsement from President Donald Trump — hit out at liberals for “politicizing” Hurricane Harvey. But disaster preparedness is always political, and so is environmental justice. As noxious fumes creep over the fence-line communities of the East End, residents there are underwater, and some of them can’t breathe.
See the original post:
Oh, and by the way, did you know there’s an EPA museum?
The one-room exhibit opened in Washington, D.C., just before Trump’s inauguration. The displays tell the history of the EPA while highlighting big Obama-era steps towards combating climate change, like the implementation of the Clean Power Plan and the signing of the Paris Agreement.
In light of Trump’s decisions to ditch both, the EPA as displayed isn’t looking quite Trump-y enough. A career EPA official told the Washington Post that, in addition to a coal display, plans are underway to add controversial EPA administrator Anne Gorsuch to the exhibit and expand on Trump areas of interest like the Superfund program. The Clean Power Plan and Paris Agreement displays are already scheduled for removal.
If you want a preview of the changes, current EPA officials have already put up a poster board that includes a photo of Pruitt shaking hands with miners and description that calls Trump’s approach to the EPA “back to the basics.” What basics are those, you might ask? We were wondering the same thing.
Deep in the Republican platform, a quirky line urges the private sector to invent ways to sop up CO2 — a gas many G.O.P. politicians assert is harmless. Original source: As Its Leaders Deny Warming Risks, the G.O.P. Platform Urges Private Sector to Capture CO2? ; ; ;
Stanford scientists find a ‘water windfall’ deep underground; its viability as a resource is problematic, its protection is essential. Source article: Will California start drilling deep for water? ; ; ;
See original article here:
“He’s talking about rolling back the clock, which I think is very dangerous.” Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock A couple of weeks ago, Donald Trump took a stage in Bismarck, North Dakota, and laid out his vision for addressing climate change and energy issues should he win the White House. It was about what you might expect from a candidate who has previously claimed that global warming is a hoax invented by Chinese bureaucrats to disadvantage US manufacturers. He railed against the historic global agreement on climate change struck in Paris last year, called President Barack Obama’s cornerstone climate policy “stupid,” and said that his administration “will focus on real environmental challenges, not the phony ones we’ve been looking at.” Though after he fulfills his promise to dismantle the “Department of Environmental,” it is hard to imagine how he would make that happen. The Washington Post called Trump’s proposals “dangerous and nonsensical,” and Christine Todd Whitman, a former Republican governor of New Jersey and head of the Environmental Protection Agency during George W. Bush’s first term, agreed. Whitman has always been a bit of a nonconformist among conservatives on climate change: She pushed hard for Bush to let the United States join the Kyoto Protocol, the last significant stab at global climate action prior to Paris, and she infamously told the Post that she left the EPA after coming under intense pressure from then-Vice President Dick Cheney to implement lax regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. These days, she co-chairs the CASEnergy Coalition, an educational coalition that promotes the use of nuclear power as a solution to climate change. In earlier, more innocent days of the Republican primary race, she endorsed Ohio Gov. John Kasich. Now she “will not vote for Trump,” but is on the fence about Hillary Clinton. The Democratic nominee, she said, “has real flaws, but hers are more within the normal parameters we’re used to. Trump’s are way outside, as far as I’m concerned.” I had a chat with Gov. Whitman about the threat Trump’s candidacy poses to Obama’s climate legacy and why his energy “plan” makes no sense: Climate Desk: What did you make of Trump’s energy speech in North Dakota? Christine Whitman: Not surprised, but disappointed. I don’t think he has a full grasp, not surprisingly, of the issues. He’s taking moves that I believe are totally contrary to the health and well-being of the country and the citizens, when you talk about walking away from [the Paris Agreement], when you talk about having a need to restart coal plants. He should know that the reason a lot of the coal plants are shutting down now has nothing to do with environmental regulations and everything to do with economics and the low price of natural gas, which he also wants to encourage. So those two things run counter to one another in a way. He’s talking about rolling back the clock, which I think is very dangerous. CD: Trump’s comments on climate and energy might seem radical, but aren’t they really just a more extreme, less articulate version of sentiments we hear from Mitch McConnell and other prominent Republicans frequently: Climate change isn’t a threat, we need to save coal and the fossil fuel industry, etc.? CW: Well, first of all, environmental protection is a Republican issue. The first president to set aside public land was Lincoln. It was Nixon who established, with a Democratic Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency. This is in our DNA. Conservation is inherently conservative, and it should be something that we embrace. So I would like to see Republicans understand this and also recognize facts. You can have economic growth and a clean and green environment. We’ve done it. It’s not a zero-sum game. They’ve just got to get off this attitude that you can’t have them both at the same time. [During the Nixon era] the public said, “We don’t like being told not to go outside from 10 to 4 because of bad air quality,” and “We don’t like seeing our land turned into a garbage dump.” That’s what drove Congress and the president to actually take action. To walk away from [environmental issues] is a very dangerous political move, if nothing else, because the public still doesn’t want dirty air and dirty water and trashed land. You really don’t have any credible scientists who say that climate change isn’t occurring, and you don’t have any credible scientists who say humans don’t play a role. If you want to ignore it, you do so at your peril. CD: And yet, here we are with a Republican nominee for president who is a climate change denier. What do you think the effect of Trump’s candidacy on Obama’s climate legacy will be? Is he lending a sense of urgency to formally finalize the Paris Agreement? CW: Well, I hope he’s not representative of the party as a whole. I mean, he’s off the charts as far as what you can expect him to do or say. He is scaring other countries, and that’s pushing a desire to get [the Paris Agreement] done while we can—and make it that much harder for him to roll back. He says he’s going to roll back a lot of things, but he can’t do it. He’s not an emperor, but he doesn’t seem to get it. He is going to try to push the powers of the presidency, the boundaries. He doesn’t seem to understand the Constitution or really care much about it. But still, some of those who oppose taking dramatic action [on climate change] in India or in China are saying, “Wait a minute, the United States is going to back out. Do we still want to be a part of this?” So it’s making it much more difficult and confusing for people. CD: What are you hoping to see from the candidates on climate change as the election moves forward? CW: Truth? I hope they don’t get into it. [An election] is the worst time to discuss serious policy, because people politicize everything. I really don’t want to see a deep dive into climate change or into these issues, other than a recognition that they exist, that they’re important, and that we have to take action. Right now, on every issue, the extremes are pushing the agendas. What I’m really scared about is that people get dug in too far. And they’ll have to move further to the left, further to the right, the lines will get harder, and then once someone is elected there will be an inability to move back to the center or to really get things done. We all know that people will say things during campaigns that they don’t really mean. Or they’ll be willing, when they come into office, to look at what the reality is. So when they get in, if they’ve really painted themselves into a corner, then we’re not going to be able to have the kind of discussion that we need to get these issues solved.
See original article:
Obama’s Budget Calls for Billions in Climate Funding
13 Tweets That Definitively Prove That Donald Trump Is Not a Scientist
Obama Just Vetoed the GOP’s Keystone Bill
BREAKING: President Obama Will Veto Congress’ Keystone XL Pipeline Bill
Scientists Bash EPA’s Take On Burning Wood For Power
Care about global climate change? Then fight local air pollution
Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to print (Opens in new window)
View original article –
President Obama includes an overdue domestic push to cut leaks in America’s vast natural gas system in a joint announcement with his Canadian counterpart. Read this article: The Obama-Trudeau Climate Pledge Contains Overdue Steps to Fix Natural Gas Leaks ; ; ;
Check out Louisiana. Andrew Cline/Shutterstock The state of Louisiana has fallen on hard times, and its situation offers some hard lessons. First, don’t let a right-wing ideologue cut your budget to the bone. Second, don’t hang your whole economy on fossil fuel extraction. The Washington Post reports on the state’s budget crisis: Already, the state of Louisiana had gutted university spending and depleted its rainy-day funds. It had cut 30,000 employees and furloughed others. It had slashed the number of child services staffers … And then, the state’s new governor, John Bel Edwards (D), came on TV and said the worst was yet to come. … Despite all the cuts of the previous years, the nation’s second-poorest state still needed nearly $3 billion — almost $650 per person — just to maintain its regular services over the next 16 months. … A few universities will shut down and declare bankruptcy. Graduations will be canceled. Students will lose scholarships. Select hospitals will close. Patients will lose funding for treatment of disabilities. Some reports of child abuse will go uninvestigated. For eight years, under former Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.), Louisiana slashed taxes and played tricks to fill budget holes. Jindal claimed that the tax cuts he pushed through would promote miraculous economic growth and make up for the lost revenue. That didn’t work, of course, just as it didn’t work on a national level under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Read the rest at Grist. See more here – Wanna See What Happens When You Rely on the Fossil Fuel Sector and Slash Taxes? ; ; ;
Original source –
Bill Gates replies to questions from Times readers on meat, gas guzzling, overcoming the vast oil industry and more. View article: Bill Gates Explains How to Make Climate Progress in a World Eating Meat and Guzzling Gas ; ; ;
As the focus on the Aliso Canyon natural gas gusher fades, can the Obama administration keep its focus on tighter leak rules? See the original post: California’s Gas Gusher is Stanched, But Where are Tougher U.S. Rules on Leaks? ; ; ;