Tag Archives: pdf

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Shutterstock

It’s an off-year election so there are no congressional races today, but some state and local battles are of immense interest to environmentalists. Here’s a quick rundown of the key green fights to keep an eye on:

Virginia governor’s race

In the gubernatorial election in Virginia, the leading candidates are virtual caricatures of their political parties when it comes to climate change. The Democrat, Terry McAuliffe, is concerned about global warming and supports renewable energy. He also used to run a (now quite troubled) greentech company. The Republican, Ken Cuccinelli, is a climate skeptic who’s been trying to score political points by whining about the Democrats’ “war on coal.” Cuccinelli previously led a witch hunt of a prominent climate scientist, Michael Mann, trying, unsuccessfully, to force the University of Virginia to turn over emails and other records related to Mann’s time at the school. (You’ll never guess who Mann has been supporting in the governor’s race.)

President Obama called out Cuccinelli’s climate illiteracy while stumping on Monday for the Democrat. “It doesn’t create jobs when you go after scientists, and you try to offer your own alternative theories of how things work and engage in litigation around stuff that isn’t political,” Obama said. “It has to do with what’s true. It has to do with facts. You don’t argue with facts.”

Virginia, a coal-producing state, used to be solidly red, but in recent years it’s turned purple. The state’s voters went for Obama in 2008 and 2012, and they look very likely to lean blue in this race. McAuliffe is firmly up in the polls.

Read more about the race here and here.

Anti-fracking ballot measures in Colorado

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into advertisements trying to convince residents of four Colorado cities to vote against ballot measures that would ban or suspend fracking.

Gov. John Hickenlooper, the pro-fracking Democrat who once drank fracking fluid in an attempt to demonstrate its harmlessness, claims the proposed measures in Boulder, Broomfield, Fort Collins, and Lafayette would be illegal. His administration is already suing one city, Longmont, for having the audacity to tell frackers to stay the hell away from their community.

“If you ban fracking you are essentially banning exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons,” Hickenlooper told Bloomberg during an interview about the ballot mesures. “Our state constitution guarantees people who own the mineral rights that there can be extraction from the surface to get those minerals.”

Washington GMO-labeling ballot measure

If Washington voters approve ballot initiative 522 [PDF], the state would mandate the labeling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients starting in 2015. The Washington Post reports that opponents have “raised at least $22 million, with large out-of-state food companies and agribusinesses like Monsanto, Dupont Pioneer, Coca-Cola, and Kellogg donating heavily.” Supporters have raised $8.4 million, mostly in small donations.

This is the first big state election battle over GMO labeling since Californians rejected a similar ballot measure one year ago. That election also saw tens of millions of dollars spent by large food corporations who want to keep their GMO ingredients a secret from their customers.

Read more about the initiative here.

Whatcom County council elections

Whatcom County in Washington state, a rural area in the northwestern corner of the country, has the power to determine whether a proposed $600 million coal terminal gets built. The Gateway Pacific Terminal would load coal mined in Wyoming and Montana onto ships bound for Asia. The county council will approve or reject key permits needed to construct the terminal. That’s why more than $1 million has flowed into four county council races from energy companies and environmentalists nationwide.

Read more about the race here and here.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Politics

Source:

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, organic, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Lawmakers seek answers after oil gushes during Colorado floods

Lawmakers seek answers after oil gushes during Colorado floods

JohnGiez

It can be easier to tell what Colorado’s floods washed away than what they left behind.

More than 60,000 gallons of oil and other petrochemical-laced fluids are now confirmed to have been spilled from fracking operations during recent floods in Colorado — and two congressmembers are calling for a hearing into the toxic eruption.

State oil officials have been doing their best to track oil spills and equipment leaks amid floods that killed eight and destroyed 1,800 homes. In an update published Monday [PDF], the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission said it is tracking 14 “notable” oil spills that released an estimated 44,000 gallons. It is also monitoring 12 leaks of “produced” water —  an estimated 17,000 gallons of water polluted with oil and gas residue from fracking operations.

Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, think that’s pretty effing disturbing. They sent a letter [PDF] last week to committee chair Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) asking him to schedule a hearing into the effects of leaks from Colorado’s fracking sector during the floods:

As Congress continues to consider policies to expand domestic oil and gas production, we would benefit from learning more about how disasters like this can impact local communities, states, and federal regulators. We respectfully request that you hold a committee hearing as soon as possible so that we may fully understand the potential grave consequences resulting from this flood.

We believe that the Committee and Congress would benefit from hearing firsthand accounts from local elected officials, the COGCC, EPA response team members, experts in oil and gas technology and innovation, and conservation advocates.

“Congress must deal with this issue to ensure that natural disasters do not also become public health disasters,” Polis said in a statement. “Not only have my constituents been dealing with damage to their homes, schools, and roads, they are increasingly concerned about the toxic spills that have occurred from the flooding of nearly 1,900 fracking wells in Colorado.”

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Link:  

Lawmakers seek answers after oil gushes during Colorado floods

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lawmakers seek answers after oil gushes during Colorado floods

Clean energy law reducing electricity costs in Ohio

Clean energy law reducing electricity costs in Ohio

Shutterstock

Ohio is getting greener, and that’s reducing the cost of power.

More than 1,000 renewable energy projects have been built in Ohio during the past five years — part of a scramble by utilities to comply with the state’s renewable energy standard. The biggest project, a wind farm, cost $600 million.

So how much are the state’s electricity customers being forced to fork out for this flurry of climate-friendly construction activity?

Nada. Not even nada — less than nada. An analysis [PDF] by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio concludes that all those green energy projects have actually reduced the price of wholesale power in the state, albeit just a little bit.

It’s true that such projects cost money to build. But, unlike fossil fuel–powered plants, their fuels — solar radiation and wind — are free. The lower long-term energy costs of all those clean power facilities has “suppressed” the market rate for dirtier forms of electricity in Ohio, the study found.

“[C]onsistent with theoretical expectations, Ohioans are already benefiting from renewable resource additions through downward pressure on wholesale market prices and reduced emissions,” says the report, written by PUC economist Tim Benedict. Midwest Energy News fleshes out the findings:

According to Benedict’s calculations, the renewable generators now producing power have reduced the cost of wholesale power by about 0.15 percent. When his study looked at the projected power from all renewable projects that the state has approved, including those not yet operational, the figure is closer to 0.5 percent.

“This confirms what other studies have found,” said Rebecca Stanfield, a deputy director for policy for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “As we add renewables, the wholesale price of electricity goes down.”

And while a wholesale price cut of half a percent may not sound like much, it’s important to keep in mind that only about 1 percent of Ohio’s power currently comes from renewable sources. The renewable standard passed in 2008 requires that that proportion gradually increase to 12.5 percent in 2025. And as the contribution from renewable power grows, so, presumably, will the savings from a falling wholesale price of fuel.

The report was published as state Sen. Bill Steitz (R) pushes, yet again, to roll back elements of Ohio’s renewable energy mandate, which he has compared to “Joseph Stalin’s five-year plan.” Fortunately for consumers and the climate, similar efforts backed by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to kill renewable energy mandates in states across the nation have been flopping.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Read original article:  

Clean energy law reducing electricity costs in Ohio

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, green energy, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Clean energy law reducing electricity costs in Ohio

Wind turbines don’t hurt property values

Wind turbines don’t hurt property values

Shutterstock

The owners of this Flintstones-style house are no poorer because of the neighboring wind turbines.

Some people who learn that wind turbines are going to be built in their neighborhood freak out about a couple of things, but science can help put their minds at ease.

First, they worry that their health will be harmed if they develop so-called “wind turbine syndrome.” But there is no evidence that wind turbines actually cause any of the ailments commonly blamed on them.

Next, they worry that the value of their property will fall. “Here come those eggshell-colored spinning things that produce energy but no pollution,” they might mutter to one another in hushed tones. “There goes the neighborhood.”

Fortunately, this concern is equally unwarranted, according to a comprehensive new study by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory researchers [PDF]. From the study:

We collected data from more than 50,000 home sales among 27 counties in nine states. These homes were within 10 miles of 67 different wind facilities, and 1,198 sales were within 1 mile of a turbine — many more than previous studies have collected. The data span the periods well before announcement of the wind facilities to well after their construction. …

Regardless of model specification, we find no statistical evidence that home values near turbines were affected in the post-construction or post-announcement/pre-construction periods. …

[T]he core results of our analysis consistently show no sizable statistically significant impact of wind turbines on nearby property values.

This was the largest study of its kind, but it was not the first. Studies published by the same laboratory in 2009 and 2011 reached the same conclusions.

“Although there have been claims of significant property value impacts near operating wind turbines that regularly surface in the press or in local communities, strong evidence to support those claims has failed to materialize in all of the major U.S. studies conducted thus far,” said lead researcher Ben Hoen.

Hoen and his colleagues dug up similar but highly localized academic studies focused on parts of Illinois, New York, Ontario, the U.K., and the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia. Only the latter study found any evidence of a potential effect of wind turbines on property values.

So unless you’re investing in real estate in western Germany, you can breathe easy about any nearby wind energy developments. They won’t harm your health, and they won’t diminish the value of your property portfolio.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Living

Continue reading – 

Wind turbines don’t hurt property values

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Plant !t, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wind turbines don’t hurt property values

Climate-denier politicians under attack by new ad campaign

Climate-denier politicians under attack by new ad campaign

ronjohnson.senate.gov

Sen. Ron Johnson will be the target of a new ad from LCV.

Here comes more bad PR for climate change–denying politicians.

Barack Obama’s advocacy group, Organizing for Action, began trying to embarrass denier Republicans earlier this year. Now the League of Conservation Voters is piling on, spending nearly $2 million on TV advertisements aimed at four GOP flat earthers.

Ads unveiled Monday ridicule the voting records and anti-scientific statements of Reps. Dan Benishek (Mich.), Mike Coffman (Colo.), and Rodney Davis (Ill.), and a fourth ad will soon target Sen. Ron Johnson (Wis.). From a League of Conservation Voters press release:

This ad campaign follows the release of bipartisan polling [PDF] by LCV showing that young voters across the country are particularly concerned about climate change and support federal action to address it. A solid majority in the poll said they are willing to hold accountable those who ignore the problem, going so far as to describe climate change deniers as “ignorant” and “out-of-touch.”

The Hill points out that LCV has run a similar campaign before:

Last election cycle, the group launched a $1.5 million effort to defeat what they called the “Flat Earth Five,” five lawmakers who were skeptical of climate change science. All but one were defeated.

The new ad targeting Davis quotes him saying “global warming stopped” 16 years ago:

In the Benishek ad, the rep is quoted describing climate change as “baloney”:

And the ad targeting Coffman likens him to an ostrich:

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Link to original:  

Climate-denier politicians under attack by new ad campaign

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Climate-denier politicians under attack by new ad campaign

World Bank joins war on coal

World Bank joins war on coal

Shutterstock

There’s a new ally in the fight against the dirtiest of fossil fuels.

The World Bank’s board of directors approved a strategy shift this week that will move the lending body formally away from its longstanding support of coal-fired power plants in favor of cleaner and smarter alternatives.

Following the adoption Tuesday of its Energy Sector Directions Paper [PDF], the World Bank will “provide financial support for greenfield coal power generation projects only in rare circumstances,” such as where there are “no feasible alternatives to coal.”

The bank isn’t morphing from sinner to saint. It will still support new fossil-fuel projects, including those powered by natural gas, along with hydropower projects that wreck rivers and displace communities. But its shift away from coal could be significant, particularly as an example for other international financing groups. In the same vein, President Barack Obama recently called for an end to America’s financing of new coal plants abroad in most circumstances.

The World Bank is a huge financier of infrastructure projects, loaning nearly $53 billion last year to poor and developing countries. Its most recent support for construction of a coal-fired power plant came three years ago, when it approved a $3 billion loan for a coal facility in South Africa.

The shift is being welcomed by environmentalists, but they are anxious to find out how the bank will define the situations in which there are “no feasible alternatives to coal.” From Reuters:

“While it misses an opportunity to close the door for good (on coal lending) it only allows it in narrowly defined cases where there are no feasible alternatives,” Justin Guay, a Washington representative for the Sierra Club, said about the new strategy.

Guay said there had been concerns China would not allow the new language to go through, as had happened with past proposals to cut back on coal funding.

The real test of the strategy may come next year, when the World Bank should decide whether to provide loan guarantees for [a] Kosovo power plant fired by coal.

The strategy paper lays out the World Bank’s new energy priorities:

In countries with low energy access, the priority will be affordable and reliable energy. Grid, mini-grid, and off-grid solutions will all be pursued for electricity. In rural, remote or isolated areas, off-grid solutions based on renewable energy combined with energy efficient technologies could be the most rapid means of providing cost-effective energy services. Engagement in cleaner cooking and heating solutions will grow. …

Efforts to improve energy efficiency — one of the most cost-effective ways to expand supply and reduce environmental impact — will be scaled up according to countries’ needs and opportunities. …

The World Bank Group will continue to support and finance all forms of renewable energy … Rapidly declining costs are making wind and solar power competitive in some settings, while geothermal energy is a relatively low-cost source of renewable energy providing a dependable supply. Biogas and biomass-based energy also play useful roles.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

See the article here:  

World Bank joins war on coal

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, Green Light, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on World Bank joins war on coal

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Shutterstock

Going up, up, up …

If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, Americans could pay as much as 40 cents more per gallon for gasoline in some parts of the country, according to a new report by the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog [PDF].

That’s because oil extracted in Canada would start to bypass traditional American markets, traveling through the pipeline to the Gulf Coast and onto tanker ships bound for international markets where oil fetches higher prices.

“The pipeline is being built through America, but not for Americans,” Consumer Watchdog researcher Judy Dugan said in a statement. “Keystone XL is not an economic benefit to Americans who will see higher gas prices and bear all the risks of the pipeline.” From the report:

The aim of tar sands producers with refining interests on the Gulf Coast — primarily multinational oil companies — is to get the oil to their Gulf refineries, which would process additional oil largely for fuel exports to hungry foreign markets. Other oil sands investors, including two major Chinese petrochemical companies and major European oil companies, have an interest in exporting crude oil and/or refined products to their markets. Such exports would drain off what the tar sands producers consider a current oversupply, and help push global oil prices higher. …

U.S. drivers would be forced to pay higher prices for tar sands oil, particularly in the Midwest. There, gasoline costs could rise by 20 cents to 40 cents per gallon or more, based on the $20 to $30 per barrel discount on Canadian crude oil that Keystone XL developers seek to erase. Such an increase, just in the Midwest, could cost the U.S. economy $3 billion to $4 billion a year in consumer income that would not be spent more productively elsewhere. The West Coast imports much smaller amounts of Canadian oil in a larger and more complicated market. Even so, a sharp price hike for Canadian oil could bump Pacific Coast gasoline prices by a few cents a gallon.

The report also connects a few corporate dots, showing who’s really intended to benefit from Keystone XL:

Consumer Watchdog

Click to embiggen.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Visit source – 

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Sprout, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

FDA moves to keep arsenic out of your apple juice

FDA moves to keep arsenic out of your apple juice

Shutterstock

Finally, more apples in our arsenic juice.

Apple juice may soon be as safe to drink as tap water. (Well, except for all that sugar.)

Nearly two years after consumer groups raised alarms about elevated levels of arsenic in some brands of apple juice, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday proposed new limits on permissible levels of the chemical, which can cause cancer and other maladies.

The FDA’s proposed “action level” for inorganic arsenic in apple juice matches the EPA’s existing rules for tap water — 10 parts per billion.

From The Christian Science Monitor:

The FDA has tested arsenic in apple juice for at least 20 years and has long said the levels are not dangerous to consumers, in particular the small children who favor the fruit juice (second only to orange juice in popularity, according to industry groups).

But the agency issued a tougher stance with its announcement Friday. Under the new regulation, apple juice containing more than 10 parts per billion could be removed from the market and companies could face legal action.

The proposal follows testing by The Dr. Oz Show and Consumer Reports [PDF] that revealed that some apple juices contained more arsenic than was allowed in tap water.

WTF is arsenic doing in apple juice anyway? The Chicago Tribune explains:

Inorganic arsenic in food can come from pesticides or from soil and groundwater pollution, though some occurs naturally in the environment. Organic arsenic is viewed as relatively safe, but emerging research suggests that two types of organic arsenic may be toxic. The FDA says these occur rarely or in negligible quantities in apple juice.

It probably doesn’t help that a lot of the apple juice sold in the U.S. comes from concentrate imported from China, a country that does not have an exemplary food-safety record.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Follow this link: 

FDA moves to keep arsenic out of your apple juice

Posted in Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on FDA moves to keep arsenic out of your apple juice

You can look forward to more blackouts in a climate-changed world

You can look forward to more blackouts in a climate-changed world

Julian Bravo

Climate change can bring with it forest fires, which can threaten power lines.

More global warming will mean a less reliable power system.

That warning comes from the Department of Energy, which released a report [PDF] on Thursday detailing the threats posed to the nation’s power infrastructure by rising temperatures, droughts, storms, floods, and sea-level rise.

“Climatic conditions are already affecting energy production and delivery in the United States, causing supply disruptions,” the report states. “The magnitude of the challenge posed by climate change on an aging and already stressed U.S. energy system could outpace current adaptation efforts, unless a more comprehensive and accelerated approach is adopted.”

Some of the threats listed in the report:

Power plants are threatened by decreased water availability and rising air and water temperatures, which make it harder to keep the facilities cool.
Refineries, oil and gas drills, power plants, and power lines along the coasts are at risk from rising seas, powerful storms, and flooding.
Hydropower, bioenergy, and some forms of solar power can be affected by droughts and rising temperatures.
Power lines carry less current and operate less efficiently in hot weather, and they are vulnerable to damage wrought by storms and forest fires.
Demand for electricity for air-conditioning is expected to rise, though demand for fuel oil and natural gas for heating is expected to fall.

According to The Hill, the release of the report marks the beginning of a larger effort by the DOE to push the energy industry to prepare for the rise in extreme weather events.

The department isn’t just talking in hypothetical terms. Click on the following map of climate-related energy disruptions to open an interactive version on the Energy Department’s website:

energy.gov

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Original post – 

You can look forward to more blackouts in a climate-changed world

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on You can look forward to more blackouts in a climate-changed world

Oregon bans some insecticides following bee deaths

Oregon bans some insecticides following bee deaths

Forestry Distributing

Banned in Oregon.

Bees and other insects can breathe a little easier in Oregon — for now. The state has responded to the recent bumbleocalypse in a Target parking lot by temporarily banning use of the type of pesticide responsible for the high-profile pollinator die-off.

For the next six months, it will be illegal to spray Safari or other pesticides [PDF] containing dinotefuran neonicotinoids in the state.

Oregon’s ban comes after more than 50,000 bumblebees and other pollinators were killed when Safari was sprayed over blooming linden trees to control aphids in a Wilsonville, Ore., parking lot. A similar incident in Hillsboro, Ore., was also cited by the state’s agriculture department as a reason for the ban.

Oregon Department of Agriculture Director Katy Coba said in a statement [PDF] that she has directed her agency to impose the ban to help prevent further such “bee deaths connected to pesticide products with this active ingredient until such time as our investigation is completed. Conclusions from the investigation will help us and our partners evaluate whether additional steps need to be considered.”

Somewhat confusingly, retailers will still be allowed to sell the products. It will just be illegal for landscapers and gardeners to actually use them. From The Oregonian:

“We’re not trying to get it off the shelves, or trying to tell people to dispose of it, we’re just telling people not to use it,” said Bruce Pokarney, a spokesperson for the department of agriculture.

While Pokarney acknowledged it would be difficult to cite individual homeowners, he said licensed pesticide applicators would be violating Oregon regulations if they use dinotefuran-based insecticides on plants in the next 180 days.

The temporary ban only affects pesticide use that might harm pollinators, like bumblebees. Safari is one of the insecticides restricted by the Agriculture Department. Most of the restricted insecticides are used primarily for ornamental, not agricultural, pest control.

Dinotefuran use in flea collars, and ant and roach control will still be allowed.

The Xerces Society, a nonprofit insect conservation group that’s helping to investigate the pollinator die-offs, thinks the temporary ban is a good idea. But Executive Director Scott Black said it would be an even better idea if sales of the pesticides were suspended, lest consumers unwittingly use them in violation of the law. “At a minimum, all products on the shelf should have clear signage about the restriction on their use,” he told Grist.

Guess who thinks the ban is not such a good idea?

“We do not believe the scope of these measures is necessary with the information available,” Safari manufacturer Valent said in a statement, “and we will work to get the restrictions lifted as soon as possible.”

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View article:

Oregon bans some insecticides following bee deaths

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oregon bans some insecticides following bee deaths