All posts by tedleeeubanks

All For Naught?

Conservation, Politics

Karla Klay alerted me to this article in the New Orleans Times-Picayune. This is one in a series that the paper has been publishing on the loss of coastal wetlands in Louisiana. For a gist of the story, here is the opening paragraph:

Even under best-case scenarios for building massive engineering projects to restore Louisiana’s dying coastline, the Mississippi River can’t possibly feed enough sediment into the marshes to prevent ongoing catastraphic catastrophic land loss, two Louisiana State University geologists conclude in a scientific paper being published today.

The result: The state will lose another 4,054 to 5,212 square miles of coastline by 2100 — an area roughly the size of Connecticut.

Ike offered Galveston a peak into the future, I believe. Our sand-starved island (victimized by a variety of engineering projects both local and inland) is simply not prepared for the additional blow of sea level rise. With the passage last week of legislation in the House to finally move the U.S. off of dead center, perhaps at last we can begin to develop the strategy necessary to moderate the impacts of global warming. I find it hard to imagine anyone opposing such a tiny first step (the battle in the Senate will be tough), but, as usual, Texas finds a way to put its best foot forward. Rep John Culberson of Texas, a Republican, said the bill “is the equivalent to a light switch tax – if this bill becomes law, Americans will pay higher taxes every time we turn on our lights.”

Brilliant.

Sierra Club Press Release on Border Wall

Conservation, Politics,

Today, 27 members of Congress urged Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to comply with all laws if she proceeds with the final approximately 40 miles of border wall construction still slated for environmentally sensitive areas in California and Texas.

The REAL ID Act of 2005 gave the Secretary of Homeland Security — an unelected official – the authority to waive any law in order to fast-track construction of infrastructure along our shared international border with Mexico. Bush administration Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff used this unprecedented authority five times, waiving more than three dozen cultural protection, religious freedom, public safety, and environmental laws.

“Ignoring laws to build walls has caused needless harm to families, communities, and wildlife,” said Michael Degnan, Sierra Club’s public lands representative. “We are heartened to hear members of Congress call on the administration to reinstate the rule of law to the borderlands, a simple act that would go a long way toward restoring responsibility to our border policy.”

In today’s letter, the 27 Representatives recognized the impacts of waiving laws at the federal, state and local levels, writing: “We believe damage that has occurred to community relationships and public lands is attributable, at least in part, to the haste with which construction has proceeded, the lack of compliance with laws and regulations, and the lack of consultation with property owners and land managers.”

In asking that the Secretary comply with all laws if additional border wall construction takes place, the members of Congress note that more “careful consideration now could save mitigation dollars later, as well as avoiding the type of impacts that will be difficult to mitigate at any cost.”

A diverse group of organizations have applauded Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA) and his colleagues for taking a stand and urging action on this critical issue.

“I’ve seen nothing that even comes close to justify waiving laws in order to fast track border wall construction,” said Congressman Bob Filner. “It concerns me that this has taken place in the past and I urge Secretary Napolitano to prevent further damage to our border communities, natural resources, and fragile wildlife habitat.”

“We should not sacrifice bedrock democratic principles like ‘consent of the governed’ and ‘representative democracy’ at the altar of the border wall,” said Reverend John Fanestil of the United Methodist Church. “Kudos to legislators working to restore due process and the rule of law on the U.S.-Mexico border.”

Jay J. Johnson-Castro, Sr., founder and president of Border Ambassadors and executive director of the Rio Grande International Study Center, Laredo Community College, said: “For those of us who live here on the border, we feel like our part of the United States is not recognized as equal to the rest of the country. When over three dozen Congressional acts were waived, we lost the legal protections that the rest of the United States enjoys. Some call our borderlands the ‘deconstitutionalized zone.'”

“The controversy over walls and waivers is far from over, despite hundreds of damaging miles of walls already built in disregard of laws meant to safeguard our lands and resources,” said Matt Clark, southwest representative for Defenders of Wildlife. “This is the time for President Obama and Secretary Napolitano to make a clear departure from the mistakes of the last administration and comply with the important laws enacted to prevent or minimize negative impacts to our wildlife and environment.”

For more information, visit http://arizona.sierraclub.org/border

The Roads to Nowhere

Conservation,

Last week I spent an evening in a charming little wine bar fronting on a major thoroughfare in Houston. Anyone who has visited Houston can testify as to the intensity of the traffic. As the din began to make speaking difficult at our table, I began to think about the impacts such masking noise must have on breeding birds. How can a Henslow’s Sparrow or Black-and-white Warbler be heard above such a cacophony?

Therefore I decided to see what existed in the literature about the impacts of roads and traffic on wildlife. Interestingly, I found quite a corpus of work that has been completed on this issue. Therefore I have posted links to a few of the many, many articles and papers that I found with a simple web search.

The results seem to be consistent. Yes, the noise from traffic does impact many species of breeding birds, even more significantly than do visual impacts. Therefore when we consider the impacts of roads on birds, we need to look well beyond the direct loss of habitat attributed to road building and the subsequent development that roads provoke. For some species and populations, new road construction may well become roads to nowhere.

Ted Eubanks

10 June 2009

Breath Deeply

Conservation, Politics, ,

Please click the following link if you cannot view this e-mail:http://www.cec.org

Latest trinational report presents most complete picture of North American industrial pollution

Montreal, 10 June 2009—Ninety percent of the 5.5 billion kilograms of toxic pollutant releases and transfers reported in North America in 2005 can be traced to about 30 substances from 15 industrial sectors across the United States, Canada and Mexico.

Taking Stock 2005, released today by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, represents the most complete picture of pollution reporting from North American industrial facilities ever assembled. Beginning this year, the CEC’s annual Taking Stock report provides a broader perspective by expanding its scope to include all data reported in 2005 to the pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs) of the United States, Canada and Mexico.

Also new this year, the report employs air release data from the US National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for criteria air contaminants—a group of pollutants associated with issues such as smog, acid rain, and respiratory effects—and for petroleum sectors not subject to reporting under the US PRTR program.

The United States accounted for about 82 percent of all reporting facilities, Canada 12 percent, and Mexico 6 percent. The year 2005 marks the second consecutive year of mandatory Mexican PRTR reporting.

“Taking Stock 2005 presents the clearest view ever of industrial pollution in North America, and confirms the progress in pollution management that we have tracked for the past decade,” said Adrián Vázquez-Gálvez, CEC’s executive director. “However, it also reveals some major blind spots. This information is critical to government, industry, and communities, and highlights issues of comparability and areas for further action on pollution reduction to address potential environmental and human health issues.”

The report shows that the principal contributors to pollutant releases and transfers reported in each country were:

  • Oil and gas extraction activities, primary metals and wastewater treatment in Canada;
  • Metal mines, electric utilities and electrical equipment manufacturing in Mexico; and
  • Chemicals manufacturing, primary metals and mines in the United States.

An in-depth look at the North American petroleum industry in this year’s report reveals that the industry reported about 1.5 billion kilograms—or one-quarter—of the 5.5 billion kilograms of toxic pollutants reported by all sectors in 2005. The industry was also responsible for 10 percent of the 32 billion kilograms of criteria air contaminants released across North America in 2005.

Analysis of 2002–2005 reporting by Canadian and US petroleum refineries and bulk storage terminals discloses that, on average, about 7 million kilograms of carcinogens and developmental or reproductive toxicants were released annually. Most of these pollutants were released to air and water.

The perspective of this year’s report remains incomplete, however—a result of national differences in pollutant and industry sector coverage and compliance. Comparing the national petroleum industry profiles also reveals one of the most important such gaps in PRTR reporting across the three countries.

Hydrogen sulfide gas, a toxic pollutant having the smell of rotten eggs, is a common byproduct of oil and gas extraction and processing. PRTR regulations in both Canada and Mexico require hydrogen sulfide to be reported. In Canada, hydrogen sulfide from the oil and gas production sector represented over 90 percent of all toxics reported by the Canadian petroleum industry in 2005. In Mexico, however, no data on this substance were reported by the petroleum industry. In the United States, neither this pollutant nor the oil and gas production sector is subject to Toxics Release Inventory reporting requirements.

The report also discusses pollutants that were transferred across national borders. The majority of these consisted of metals such as lead, zinc, copper and nickel compounds, mainly sent to recycling facilities. A small number of other chemicals, such as sulfuric acid, phosphorus, and xylenes, were also sent across borders for recycling or other treatment.

Taking Stock compiles data from the three pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs) in North America: Canada’s National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI), the United States’ Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), and Mexico’s Registro de Emisiones y Transferencia de Contaminantes (RETC).

The Taking Stock Online website allows users to further explore PRTR data for North America with customized reports by pollutant, facility, sector or geographic region. Taking Stock Online also provides interactive mapping of data search results using Google Maps, and features a North America-wide map layer displaying point-specific industrial pollutant data in Canada, Mexico and the United States.

Using the Google Earth mapping service, the CEC’s map layer displays about 35,000 North American industrial facilities that reported releases and transfers of pollutants in 2005. You can access this information at: http://www.cec.org/takingstock/MappingTool.aspx?varlan=en-US.

Commission for Environmental Cooperation
393, rue St-Jacques Ouest, Bureau 200
Montréal (Québec) Canada H2Y 1N9
Tel: (514) 350-4300; Fax: (514) 350-4314
E-mail: info@cec.org
Website: http://www.cec.org

To unsubscribe from this news service, send an e-mail to: info@cec.org