Air & Water Pollution

...now browsing by category

In the 1970′s things were so bad that rivers were burning & paint was corroding on cars from the filth we spewed into the air & water. We got mad and some improvements were made, but the problem hasn’t gone away.

 

I Was Green When Green Wasn’t Cool!

Monday, May 31st, 2010

With apologies to Barbara Mandrell

*I wrote this originally in October of 2008, before we knew the outcome of the election, the extent of this recession, that Copenhagen would fizzle (shoulda seen that one coming) and that many of the suppositions made in “Hot, Flat, etc.” would be put in storage because there wasn’t any damn money to fuel the consumerism engine.  They haven’t been proven wrong, however.  They are just hibernating, waiting for the rainy season to return.

Obviously, I am still waiting for the Obama administration to step up.

And now we have this unbelievably horrible oil well run amok in the Gulf of Mexico, (which anyone with more brains than Sarah Palin knew would happen eventually); corporations and communities are looking at Great Lakes water with impure thoughts and intent; and the Asian Carp Spill is just waiting to happen in the Chicago Sanitary Canal, a spill of biological pollution that will kill the Great Lakes as surely as the BP oil debacle is killing marine and estuarine food chains out in the Gulf of Mexico.

We nattering naybobs have been trying to point out that environmental oversight is a pretty good use of the federal government, and we should insist that that work happen in an unhurried, non-biased way.

But we’re a nation of addicts, and we don’t care if the trash gets carried out, the dishes washed, or the baby’s diaper gets changed as long as we don’t run out of oil.  You won’t hear that coming from the Oil Cartels because they only want to make money, and addicts are a crucial part of their business plan. You won’t hear that coming from the majority of politicians, because addicts are the best liars on earth.  They lie so convincingly that they have fooled themselves into believing that everything is just fine and normal.  But even the most casual observer sees things are neither fine nor normal.  As with other sorts of addicts, the afflicted seek to deflect responsibility away from themselves by blaming others and attempting to undermine the authority and qualifications of the researchers and doctors who spend their lives understanding the illness and prescribing cures. That’s why all the talking points of the anti-environment, anti-government, pro-business as usual crowd slam academia and scientific experts.

“Cigarettes won’t hurt me, that’s just something the government says so that they can increase the tobacco tax.”

“There ain’t no global warming!”

“Drill Baby Drill!”

(btw – Just because they are sick, doesn’t mean that they are not also morons.)

So with no further ado, here is an almost two-year-old piece that you can plug the BP oil well failure, diversion of Great Lakes Water, and the Asian Carp time-bomb into in all the appropriate places, it still rings true.


I‘ve been fuming for a good while now about the state of the global ecology, and how it’s been like watching a train wreck film one frame at a time.

No, that’s not quite accurate.

It’s been like being the psychic in a crime drama who really does see what is going to happen next, but no one listens because everyone thinks that you are crazy. You know what is going to happen, but there isn’t anything you can do to stop it. And I’m not the only one who feels this way. There have been thousands of writers, professors, research scientists, reporters, resource managers, parents, gardeners, even economists and other real-life psychics trying to point out that a crash is about to happen only to be given a condescending look and told that we shouldn’t worry, the professionals are in control of the situation. And we should take our medicine more regularly.

And so I’ve been doing some fence sitting of late trying to decide whether to say anything or not, and have decided that I really must point out that

We Fucking Told You!

By “We” I mean the folks with a basic environmental education and a comprehension of some simple ecological principles like, “Don’t fill your bed with poop.” The folks who have been called tree-huggers, eco-nazis, granola bars, Woodsy the Owl, wacko, and worse by proponents of unbridled growth and industrialization. You know, “Free Market” types.

I’m not going to use any political labels, they tend to have a lot of gray area anyway, but we all know who you are. The men and women who pursue short term gain without thought of how the pursuit will impact things down the line not just for you, but for the community as a whole. The men and women who think that the future will take care of itself and that technology can figure out how to fix whatever you break before the shit hits the fan.

You aren’t going to invest in the research or implementation of said technology. That’s someone else’s job. And it better not be funded with YOUR tax dollars. The government is the problem here, not you. All the government wants to do is tax you, limit your freedom to do as you damn well please, and leave early on Fridays.

But when the aforementioned fecal matter does contact the rapidly revolving air circulation device, who you gonna call? Well, you probably won’t call anybody because you will be laying low hoping no one notices how badly you fucked-up, but we all know that the government is gonna get involved in cleaning up your mess somewhere down the line.

When the government has to clean-up after you it suddenly doesn’t seem like such a bad idea for them to pay for the job with those tax dollars we were talking about earlier, does it? Never mind that the money comes from all of us taxpayers collectively, this is a bigger issue, your sorry ass needs saving! It may be a government agency doing the work, or it may be one of the various regulatory agencies forcing you to either clean up your own mess or pay someone else to do it. The issue may end up in one of the government courthouses to be sorted out, and God willing, someone may have to spend some time in jail (another government institution) thinking about what they have done. (Not that it will help correct your attitude, but it will help the rest of us feel better about the whole thing.)

This is all bass ackwards, but it’s been SOP for as long as any of us can remember. There has always been the belief, at least in our Western tradition (Western civilization, not the old west), that there is enough elasticity in the global system to permit us to recover from whatever stupidity we inflict upon the world. We will never run out of resources, we just need to keep looking around and we’ll find what we want/need.

Hot, Flat, and Crowded , by Thomas L. Friedman (Published by Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2008) is a good explanation of why that model was wrong, and explains that we don’t have all that much play in the global ecology or economy any longer. Mr. Friedman, Foreign Affairs Columnist for the New York Times (a title that probably sounds juicier than it really is) has obviously done his homework for this book, and I hope that it gets read, and more importantly understood, by the right people.

However, (and this is the exasperating part) the basic premise of the book has been around for ages! We live in a closed and finite system. (Think really big aquarium.) All of our actions have consequences, many of which can be predicted and avoided. You don’t even have to resort to math in most instances, its all been worked out for you. You just need to do your homework, or hire someone who did their homework, and plug the variables into your business plan. You need to create another heading for “environmental impacts.” There may be none, but you need to ask the questions and plan how you will handle any impacts that you cause. Yes, it may well increase costs. And so does cleaning the place periodically, repairing stuff that breaks or wears out, and taking out the trash.

The problem is that greed and arrogance cause lots of people to think that the fundamental truths of the universe won’t apply in their instance, or they just don’t care so long as they get theirs. There is also the problem of ignorance of the ramifications of their actions to take into account. But why is ignorance of natural laws an excuse when it isn’t for any cultural laws? Break banking laws and you are in deep shit. Deplete or compromise our life support system and no one bats an eye. At least they didn’t until very recently.

Just this week no less a giant of our national economy than Alan Greenspan conceded that the free market approach in banking screwed the pooch. He’s said before that the US has “abandoned the notion that we should leave crises to be resolved solely by the marketplace,”. Now the markets are less free and banks, insurance companies, and mortgages are being socialized. (In a neo-con administration, no less!) I want to emphasize that this happened in the financial sector, one of the most scrutinized, traditionally conservative industries on the planet. Millions of individual fortunes and billions of lives have been adversely effected world-wide by this failure to protect the common good. Now world leaders are scrambling to clean up the mess and are spending unbelievable sums of money to do it. We need those leaders to realize that the banking crisis, huge as it may be, is dwarfed by the ecological crisis we are now in.

It is my greatest hope that the next administration steps up to the plate for our global environment and makes it a priority to require government, business and industry to exercise the same level of diligence in environmental matters as are required in fiscal matters, and that congress has the stones to fund the necessary enforcement and remediation. Because as we all have been so forcefully reminded, without enforcement there is no accountability beyond the next fiscal quarter. And while living through a deep recession sucks, the economy will correct in several years. If we allow the global environment to break down, correction will only happen in the fullness of geologic time.

As Thoreau said over a hundred years ago,

What good is a fine house if you don’t have a tolerable planet to put it on?

JP
EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Ya wanna make a bet?

Tuesday, May 25th, 2010

Over at the BBC, Richard Black reports that bookies are taking bets on which Gulf of Mexico species will be the first to go extinct as a result of BP’s oil well catastrophe, and how doing so may lead to greater environmental awareness in non-environmentally aware populations.  He goes on to discuss just how many people that group includes, and how hard it is to get our message out to people who aren’t currently on the bandwagon, whatever our message is.

What do you think?  Is this a novel concept for raising awareness of, or heartless profiteering on, a natural disaster?

Brian

###

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Pennsylvania Finds Gas Wells Have Contaminated Drinking Water

Friday, April 16th, 2010

Just a very short up-date and a link to an article on Marcellus Shale gas well problems over at Pro Publica.

As I’ve said here before, there are numerous impacts to water resources from hydraulic fracturing of gas-bearing shales.  It’s not a ‘what if,’ but just a question of when and how much impact.

The reporters over at Pro Publica are really setting the bar quite high in on-line journalism.  (What’s up with that?)  These folks are reporting the way they taught the craft back in the old days at Ernie Pyle Hall on the Indiana University Campus.  Objective, factual, well researched, informative.  The 5 “W’s” and the “H” all get explored.  I’m really impressed.  So was the Pulitzer Committee.

Enjoy the weekend!

Brian

###

Cabot Oil & Gas’s Marcellus Drilling to Slow After PA Environment Officials Order Wells Closed

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Why do we always get blamed for everything we do?!?

Friday, April 9th, 2010

While I can’t be certain (it was a while ago) I seem to remember my younger brother getting reprimanded for something or other when he was in grade school, and he stormed out of the room shouting, “I always get blamed for everything I do!!”  Well, now it’s the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) crying.

In a comment letter they sent to the EPA in response to the agency’s nationwide study of hydraulic fracturing impacts, IPAA mouth-piece Lee Fuller whines,

The Scoping Materials document raises a broad array of issues for possible research. In our view, however, it goes well beyond relationships between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. As the Scoping Materials note, Congress requests “… the Agency to carry out a study on the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water….” The Scoping Materials expansion of this mandate bring into play consideration of a Life Cycle Assessment, air emissions issues, community health and environmental justice issues and many others that would distract the study from its Congressional intent.

As I pointed out in the previous post on fracking, contamination of drinking water is only one of the potential impacts the procedure may produce, and perhaps not the worst, depending on which shale formation we are talking about.  In the February 18, 2010 memo to Energy & Environment sub-committee members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, many of the other risks are specifically mentioned, and must be addressed by the EPA study.  Not just because the E&E Committee asked for that, but because, the IPAA notwithstanding, its stupid to look at a single impact as if it was in a vacuum.  Fracking has a host of impacts that are all inter-related, and any competent study needs to look at them in a comprehensive, systems oriented, way.  The science will be better, the cost will be much lower than trying to approach the problem piece-meal, and rule-makers and legislators will have the whole picture to look at, not just one little piece.

The IPAA’s Fuller would much rather “that the first focus of the research study should include the involvement of the state regulatory agencies that have designed and implemented programs to protect ground water.”  Because, as everyone knows, a hodgepodge of different laws in gas producing states where the IPAA has more pull are WAY better than a comprehensive federal law with real teeth.

The oil & gas industry steadfastly deny that fracking has ever caused a problem in anyone’s well water.  Well, not all by itself, anyway.  The main point, they say, is its not their fault.

“Why do we always get blamed for everything we do?!?”

The reason is simple.  They are refusing to accept responsibility for their actions.  We all learned in kindergarten that we were responsible if, say, we threw a block and it hit Sally in the eye.  We could try to blame the block, but it never worked with our teachers, did it?  And once we were made aware of this personal responsibility thing, we all became pretty darn good at spotting those classmates who were guilty of transgressions but were always trying to blame something or someone else for their actions.

Apparently they can do really well in certain lines of business, at least for a time.

We are all sick unto death of corporations and their leaders denying their culpability in the face of obviously damning evidence.  Certain banks, the tobacco industry, various drug companies, whatever.  We have a very well developed sense of right and wrong, thank you.  And when something is wrong it bothers us mightily.  But for some reason, if you have tons of PR folks and money for top legal minds you can get way with about anything.  Especially if you have been lobbying to make sure that the rules are nebulous in the first place, and skewed in your favor.

“memo”

http://theroundriver.com/

http://snipurl.com/vclld

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

WTF?* Hydraulic Fracturing in Antrim Shale will impact water resources

Friday, March 19th, 2010

(*What the Frack?  Research indicates that you have to use some variant of this pun in any discussion of the topic.  Sorry.)

There has been a lot of interest lately in the implications of increased use of hydraulic fracturing technology in gas and oil bearing shales to enable extraction of stocks of gas or oil that are not recoverable by conventional means.  First, what is hydraulic fracturing?

A really good introduction (with some industry and scientific jargon) is a paper written by ALL Consulting of Tulsa, OK.  In part, they say that-

The process of hydraulic fracturing as typically used for shale gas development involves the pumping of tens of thousands of barrels of sand laden water into the target shale zone. Fluids pumped into the shale creates fractures or openings through which the sand flows, at the same time the sand acts to prop open the fractures that have been created. Once the pumping of fluids has stopped the sand remains in place allowing fluids (both gas and water) to flow back to the wellbore.

A quicker overview was made by an intern from Cornell University in this PowerPoint presentation on fracking for the Broome County, NY county health department.

While we need natural gas, we also need clean water, and must protect our surface and ground water from both pollution and depletion as oil and gas reserves are extracted.  This presents challenges everywhere you might drill a well, and there are some particular implications for drilling in the Antrim shales in northern Michigan.  These challenges are made all the more difficult because fracking fluids are specifically exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act, at the urging of (wait for it!) VP Cheney!!  What a shock, huh?

In a February 18, 2010   memo to Energy & Environment sub-committee members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Chairman Henry A. Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Edward J. Markey point out some of their concerns with fracking, including the exemption from EPA oversight.

In 2005, Congress exempted hydraulic fracturing from regulation under the SDWA as part of the Energy Policy Act.18 Many dubbed this provision the “Halliburton loophole” because of Halliburton’s ties to then-Vice President Cheney and its role as one of the largest providers of hydraulic fracturing services. Specifically, Congress modified the definition of “underground injection” to exclude “the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities.” As a result of this exemption, EPA cannot use the SDWA to regulate hydraulic fracturing unless it can show the use of diesel fuels.

Environmental groups, public health officials, and communities across the country have raised other concerns about hydraulic fracturing, beyond potential impacts on drinking water. In Texas, state regulators are responding to tests showing high levels of benzene in the air near wells in the Barnett Shale gas fields. In Pennsylvania, state regulators are facing a new challenge of how to ensure proper disposal of the millions of gallons of wastewater generated from natural gas development in the Marcellus Shale. In New York, the state Department of Environmental Conservation analyzed wastewater extracted from wells and found levels of radium-226 as high as 267 times the limit safe for discharge into the environment and thousands of times the limit safe for people to drink. Others have raised concerns about water scarcity, since the drilling and hydraulic fracturing of a horizontal shale gas well may require 2 to 4 million gallons of water.

This is a big issue when it comes to water here in Michigan.  Most gas bearing shales don’t produce as much water as the Antrim “play” during extraction, in part because the Antrim formation is shallow, only 200 feet below the surface in some areas, and less than 2500 feet everywhere.  Most other gas bearing shale formations are thousands or tens of thousands of feet below the surface.  The Antrim is already naturally fractured to a good extent, yet still needs additional fracking.  And fracking isn’t a one and done procedure.  It will need to be re-fracked several times to keep production up, and with the water present in the formation it probably won’t hit peak production volumes for a year or more after fracking, while the fracking fluids and the natural water, bearing a variety of chemicals and NORMs (Naturally Occuring Radioactive Materials), are pumped out to allow the gas to flow.  All of this water has to be treated, which means hundreds or thousands of trips over the surrounding roads with big tank trucks, or pipelines.  Municipal water treatment plants aren’t set up to deal with this type of pollution (and in the case of fracking fluids, they won’t even know exactly what is there due to “trade secrets”) so often drillers seek to inject the polluted water deep underground and forget about it.  Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.  Recycling and re-use sounds better, and would lessen the demands on local water supplies (aquifers, streams, lakes) as well.

And the demand on local water resources will be phenomenal.  Horizontal bore fracking uses lots of water, as was pointed out in the congressional memo above.  According to the Michigan Public Service Commission web site there were 9700 producing wells in the Antrim play in 2008.  If we add just a few thousand that aren’t producing, but will with fracking we can easily imagine 10,000 wells working at a time.  If they all are fracked every few years, to the tune of 4 million gallons of water each time, we are talking about a whole lot of water that won’t be available to drinking wells, irrigation wells, rivers, streams and lakes.

The area’s major river is the Jordan, Michigan’s first wild and scenic river.  According to the USGS, the 40 year average mean daily flow in East Jordan ranges from 218 cubic feet per second in April to 171 cfs during July and August.  My back-of-an-envelope math translates that into about 14.77 million cfs/day.  One cfs = 7.48 gallons per second.  That’s about 110.5 million gallons per day (if my math is good.  YMMV.)  So fracking 27 wells would use the equivalent of all the water that flows through the town of East Jordan in a day.  Fracking 10,000 wells would use more water than flows through the river in East Jordan in a year.

And that is each time they are fracked, and we know that they will need to be given repeated treatments to keep the gas flowing.

We need natural gas.  But in northern Michigan, we need abundant, clean, cold, water more.  Pollute that water, or seriously reduce the volume available, and our regional ecology, quality of life, and our number one industry, tourism suffer proportionally.

Until we have rock solid rules and procedures in place to safely monitor and regulate hydraulic fracturing, it isn’t a practice we should accept.  Until we have assurances that our water resources won’t suffer, either through pollution from extracted water and fracking fluids or excessive de-watering of our aquifers and surface waters, hydraulic fracturing is a gamble we can’t afford to take.

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Mr. Carp goes to Washington

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

Rep. James Oberstar (D – MN8) did a nice job of chairing a hearing of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on the Asian Carp problem the Great Lakes faces.  It was the first time I have watched a webcast of a Congressional hearing, and I have to say I liked it a lot better than I thought I would.  I’ve worked in state, local and county government, and lobbied state legislatures, so this had a pretty familiar feel.

There were the elected officials being sufficiently non-committal (regardless of what they really thought) to encourage the panel of speakers.  The administration’s man, Cameron Davis, (late of the Alliance for the Great Lakes, now the EPA Great Lakes Czar) was holding up the framework from the Carp Summit the day before and politely pointing out that he had been trying to get action on the Carp issue for 5 years or so, but assuring everyone that the administration had the bit in their teeth and were now on the right track.  The guy from the Army Corps in full dress uniform assuring all assembled that they are studying the hell out of the situation, just like they were directed to do, and that their existing projects were really important and everyone should back off and let them engineer stuff.  Everyone else was predictable as well.  I want to congratulate Michigan DNRE Director Humphries for being very cordial, well spoken & sticking to her guns, insisting that the lakes must be physically separated from the Mississippi drainage permanently.  Period.  Another stand-out was Professor Lodge from Notre Dame, the guy who has been developing the eDNA techniques that let us know where fish have been even if we can’t find the fish (which, as any fisherman will tell you, happens more than we care to admit).  He appeared to be a careful academic, and chose his words carefully in answering questions, even though you could tell that he wanted to say something like, “Just fill the damn canal in, will ya?”

Rep. Oberstar runs a good hearing.  He was even-handed and was respectful to everyone there, even thanking them several times for braving the east coast blizzard and the likely-hood of being stranded in town for a while.

My favorite part of the whole affair was when Chairman Oberstar drew a parallel between the environmental and human suffering that was inflicted on New Orleans by the MRGO canal, which also only sees very light and easily re-routed shipping traffic, to the CSSC, and asked the USACE officer if he couldn’t see closing the Chicago canals as being as beneficial as the closing of MRGO .  The USACE officer completely avoided answering the question but talked instead of the complexity of the engineering issues involved in Chicago and ways that they might regulate the locks differently, but not necessarily better.  I got the impression that it hurt the Corps feelings to be told to shut down MRGO, and they don’t want to close another cool, old, canal just because it has some problems that they can engineer more solutions for, if we give them more money.  Unfortunately, the most recent plan to put $78 million into band-aids won’t fix the problem, and there is still no permanent solution to the trans-basin migration of invasive alien species.

The Army Corps reminds me of a gear-head neighbor I used to have.  He didn’t have lots of money, but he loved tinkering on old cars just to prove that he could make them run again, if only for a short time.  This wasn’t Jay Leno pouring all the money needed into a project car to restore it to better-than-new condition.  He would fix one thing only to find another problem.  But he kept at it, because that’s what he liked to do.  At one point his wife told me that his hobby was, “Buying old, junk cars and working on them until he had to pay someone to haul them away.”   It was dirty, smelly, and loud work carried on in and around his garage.  The projects would sit around for months with no discernible progress being made.  The neighbors all grumbled.  But at least  it was his place and his money.

The Corps, on the other hand,  isn’t playing with their own land & money, but ours.  It’s time they were told that their canal and diversion projects at the south end of Lake Michigan need to go because they’re an eyesore, are creating a public nuisance, and are a health hazard.  As Chicago’s neighbors on the lake, we need to put our foot down and not let the tiny bit of out-dated commerce created by these dinosaurs ruin our property values.  And Chicago needs to clean-up their sewage like the rest of us and put the water back where they found it in no worse shape than when they borrowed it.  This won’t just benefit the Great Lakes, but the waterways and communities downstream from Chicago all the way to and including the Gulf of Mexico who are now getting, literally, shit upon.  You’d think that not having 2 billion gallons of water a day flowing down the river might help with downstream flooding a little as well, wouldn’t you?

What is complicated about getting a big suction dredge to the south end of the lake and filling the places where Lake Michigan leaks out with sand?  There are only about 6 of them from Burns Harbor, IN  to north of Chicago.  They could do it in a couple months, tops.  Then we would have a permanent physical separation of the Mississippi and Great Lakes drainages with no easy way for invasive alien species to cross from one to the other.

Just like it was before 19th Century Chicagoans “improved” it by building the canal in the first place.

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Industrial Disease

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

In  a piece titled, The attack of the killer everything, the BBC’s Richard Black makes a pretty good case for the world-wide decline in amphibians and bees being linked to the piling on of environmental stress including lack of habitat, food, and perhaps most interesting, diversity.

Bee & Butterfly

So its not just humans who are not eating properly, not using sunblock, exposed to toxic chemicals in our air and water, and living in environments that we were not adapted to emotionally and psychologically.

This unhealthy environment is cause for concern, and one reaction to it has been the rise of the “Smart Growth” movement.  Over at the Huffington Post, Seth Bauer interviewed one of the deans of Smart Growth, Architect Andres Duany, who has written a new book titled, appropriately enough, The Smart Growth Manual. From the article:

Duany began by identifying three concurrent crises that he traced directly to the American lifestyle: Peak oil (the likelihood that we’ve already consumed more than half the planet’s petroleum in barely 100 years), the housing bubble, and global climate change. “It’s where we live, the size of our houses, the distances we drive for work, commerce, play–everything.”

And there’s a brutal irony to our long record of poor choices, Duany says: Other countries are emulating it. As they become wealthier per capita, it’s the American lifestyle that they aspire to, the one that has undermined our health, our social engagement, and our environment. He laughs. “In some ways, it’s our only chance,” he says, of staying on top. “We can ruin China by making extremely unpleasant places for them.” What justifies density is urbanism, he says. “You give up your back yard for street life. But they’re getting neither. They’re getting Tyson’s Corner.”

The solution for all of us is to make choices for land use based on good science, not what is expedient or produces the highest short-term gain.  So,  “The solutions to this oversized, expensive, and planet-killing misery, Duany says, are simple, obvious, and nearly impossible to implement.”

I know how tiring it can get to keep hearing this, and it does seem that we’ve been saying it for years, but the need for more environmental education among all peoples is critical to initiating any needed changes.  There is probably a majority of people who don’t see a problem if we lose amphibians and bees all together.  They don’t know what they are “good for.”  We are at Earth Day +40 years, and though we have made gains, we still have far to go, and it’s getting late.

By allowing biological diversity to continue to diminish we are rushing toward a day when our planet won’t be able to support us.  But relying on enlightened self interest fails to take into account the “what good is it?” argument.  We must reach that point where frogs, bees, bluebells and brown trout have standing and are seen as legitimate stakeholders.  Because right now we are treating the planet like almost all empires have treated indigenous peoples.  They aren’t like me, they don’t vote, they have something I want, they have to go.  But we do this at our peril.

A great illustration of this is the new movie “Avatar.”  If you haven’t seen it yet, go!  Or rent the disc when it comes out and watch it with an awareness that it is a warning against our specie’s ignorance and avarice that rings true.

We need to start a foundation and a telethon to find a cure for Industrial Disease before it’s too late.

JP

###

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare

Just How Dirty Are Great Lakes Freighters?

Saturday, November 21st, 2009

The dirtiest remaining industrial polluter in the Midwest floats.  It is the fleet of 133 giant lake freighters (Lakers) that hauls bulk material like salt, iron ore, coal, limestone, and grain up and down the Great Lakes to ports in both the USA and Canada, passing close to the greatest concentrations of people in the Midwest.  In performing its job of enforcing the Clean Air Act the US EPA has proposed new regulations that will require that the Lakers clean up their act, saving 33,000 lives a year and reducing smog throughout the heartland.  You might think that the EPA had a pretty good idea here.  Not everyone would agree.

The Lake Carriers’ Association, the Lakers’ trade group, says that they know that the Lakers are dirty.  They really think that the idea of clean air is generally good, just not when it costs them money.  Now they are calling on their friends in congress and the Canadian government to make the big, bad EPA leave them alone.

At the center of this issue is the fuel that the Lakers burn, “bunker fuel,” or simply “bunker” for short.

Wikipedia says, Bunker fuel is technically any type of fuel oil used aboard ships. It gets its name from the containers on ships and in ports that it is stored in; in the days of steam they were coal bunkers but now they are bunker-fuel tanks.” So when they switched to the tar-like petroleum residue they now use, they kept calling it bunker, presumably because they don’t like to change.

Today’s bunker fuel is in a class of fuels called “residual fuel oils,” meaning the gunk that is left over after they make other fuels like gas and lighter diesel, kerosene, naphtha, etc.  It is so thick that it must be heated to flow, and burns so dirtily that the boilers have to have the soot cleaned out of them daily.  In addition to the nitrogen oxide (think smog) and soot, bunker produces 174 tons of CO2 per one million BTUs produced, and contains 30,000 parts per million (ppm) of sulfur.  The fuel semis use contains just 15 ppm sulfur and produces 161 tons of CO2 per million BTUs.

An article from today’s Washington Post points out,

Large vessels rank second only to power plants as to the health risk their air pollution poses, and the EPA estimates the proposal will produce more health benefits than those it has applied to off-road vehicles, diesel trucks and other sources. Without further regulation by 2030, the agency projects that smog-forming nitrogen oxide emissions from the ships will more than double, to 2.1 million tons a year.

Almost as troubling is that, according to Wanda Fabriek, International Fuel Executive of Intertek Oil, Chemicals and Agri, writing for Bunker World,

The chemistry of residual fuels is probably the most complex of the oil barrel and some of the components of the final blend are, it must be accepted, resultants rather than controlled fractions. Furthermore, as the various specification grades of residual fuels are not blended at the refineries the particular chemistry of the vast variety of possible cutter stocks available to the supply chain also needs to be added to the total unknown.

So exactly what is coming out of the stack isn’t known.

What is known is that burning bunker fuels should be a crime.  One of our most pristine and remote national parks, Isle Royale in northern Lake Superior, has smog issues!  And remember that what goes up must come down, so eventually the air-borne pollutants will become water pollution.

Yes, this new rule would cost the Laker industry money.  (They will also enjoy some cost savings by burning a cleaner fuel that is a liquid at ambient temperatures, requiring less boiler maintenance and no pre-heating equipment maintenance.)  Every other industry in the country has had to clean up its act, why should these guys get a pass?  They maintain that the costs to retrofit or build new Lakers will cause them to be priced out of the bulk hauling business.  The fact is, no other form of transportation can even come close to the efficiencies and volumes that a lake freighter can for hauling bulk materials, and all of their customers are already set up for receiving goods from these freighters.  Allowing them to continue to be one of the worst polluters in the country is unconscionable from an environmental and public health standpoint and gives them an unfair business edge on the commerce side.

It’s time that these industrial polluters were required to come into the 21st century and do their part for the Great Lakes region’s health and well being.  After all, if it weren’t for these lakes they wouldn’t exist, and for them to see the lakes only as their private seaway is arrogant in the extreme.  There are millions of other residents and visitors who use the lakes for a variety of reasons that do not depend upon the Lakers, but do depend upon clean air and clean water.

Will you please take a minute to contact your Senators or Representative in DC and tell them that an exemption for this industry is not consistent with the long-term health of our region or the planet?

EvernoteGoogle ReaderGoogle GmailDeliciousShare
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes
Proudly using Dynamic Headers by Nicasio WordPress Design