Environmental News

[Cin]

I didn't see a thread specifically for news about the things that are happening to our environment, so I thought I would start one.

I look forward to learning some things from what other people post here.

But since I started the thread, I'll go first.

Plastic Lies

[Cin]

‘Super sherpa’ says climate change may make Mount Everest unclimbable

From Agence France-Presse (AFP)

Climate change is altering the face of the Himalayas, devastating farming communities and making Mount Everest increasingly treacherous to climb, some of the world’s top mountaineers have warned.

Apa Sherpa, the Nepali climber who has conquered Mount Everest a record 21 times, said he was disturbed by the lack of snow on the world’s highest peak, caused by rising temperatures.

“In 1989 when I first climbed Everest there was a lot of snow and ice but now most of it has just become bare rock. That, as a result, is causing more rockfalls which is a danger to the climbers,” he told AFP.

“Also, climbing is becoming more difficult because when you are on a mountain you can wear crampons but it’s very dangerous and very slippery to walk on bare rock with crampons.”

Speaking after completing the first third of a gruelling 1,700-kilometre (1,100-mile) trek across the Himalayas, Apa Sherpa would not rule out the possibility of Everest being unclimbable in the coming years.

“What will happen in the future I cannot say but this much I can say from my own experiences — it has changed a lot,” he said an an interview with AFP in the village of Gati, 16 kilometres from Nepal’s border with Tibet.

The 51-year-old father-of-three, dubbed “Super Sherpa”, began his working life as a farmer but turned to the tourism industry and mountaineering after he lost all his possessions when a glacial lake burst in 1985.

He is on a 120-day walk dubbed the Climate Smart Celebrity Trek with another of the world’s top climbers, Nepali Dawa Steven Sherpa, with the pair expected to reach the finish on May 13.

The expedition, the first official hike along the length of Nepal’s Great Himalayan Trail since it opened last year, will take in some of the world’s most rugged landscapes and see the duo ascending beyond 6,000 metres (19,600 feet).

“I want to understand the impact of climate change on other people but also I’d like tourism to play a roll in changing their lives as it has changed mine,” said Apa Sherpa.

Research published by the Kathmandu-based International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) last year showed Nepal’s glaciers had shrunk by 21 percent over 30 years.

A three-year research project led by ICIMOD showed 10 glaciers surveyed in the region all are shrinking, with a marked acceleration in loss of ice between 2002 and 2005.

Scientists say the effects of climate change could be devastating, as the Himalayas provide food and energy for 1.3 billion people living in downstream river basins.

Environmental campaigners refer to the mountain range as the “third pole” and say the melting glaciers are the biggest potential contributors to rising sea levels after the North and South Poles.

Scientists blame confusion and scepticism over climate change on a blunder in a 2007 United Nations report which falsely claimed that the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by as soon as 2035.

On the ground, however, mountain communities are already alarmed by dramatic shifts in weather patterns, two-time Everest summiteer Dawa Steven Sherpa told AFP as he and Apa completed the first 530 kilometres of their trek.

“Right from the beginning we saw the effects of climate change on tea plantations in Ilam district,” he said.

“These areas would not normally get frost and it is destroying their entire crop. These are cash crops that employ thousands of people, even on one farm.

“From what the local people are saying, it’s getting colder in the winter and hotter in the summer and it is the cold they are worried about.”

[Cin]

How “Drill, Baby, Drill” and “Yes We Can” Got Married
by Subhankar Banerjee

American military prefers to make preemptive strikes. We know this. In America, corporations have enormous influence over the government—these days they essentially run the government. We know this too. And now a giant corporation has made a preemptive strike against nonprofit organizations. “Arctic Ocean drilling: Shell launches preemptive legal strike” is the title of a recent Los Angeles Times article. Shell’s legal attack is against REDOIL—a small indigenous human rights organization in Alaska and 12 environmental organizations fighting to stop dangerous drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas in Arctic Alaska—Alaska Wilderness League, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace, National Audubon Society, Natural Resources Defense Council, Northern Alaska Environmental Center, Ocean Conservancy, Oceana, Pacific Environment, Sierra Club, and The Wilderness Society. This is historic.

On Thursday, I requested Cindy Shogan, Executive Director of Alaska Wilderness League in Washington, D.C. about how she would respond. Following is the email statement I received from her:

“In a true–life David vs. Goliath parable, Royal Dutch Shell, a foreign company that makes millions of dollars in profits per hour, is forcing Alaska Wilderness League, a grassroots–based nonprofit with the sole purpose of advocating for Alaska’s lands, waters and native people, into court—and seeking fees and costs against us. I suppose if you’re like Shell, and you have billions of dollars to throw around, you can engage in this desperate ploy, instead of proving on the ground that you can actually clean up an oil spill in Arctic conditions.

My response to Shell is this: Alaska Wilderness League will not be bullied. We will take the time we need to evaluate whether Shell’s oil spill response plan, for the most aggressive course of Arctic Ocean drilling ever proposed in history, meets the letter of the law. We owe that much to the Iñupiat people who have thrived on Alaska’s Arctic coast for thousands of years, and the extraordinary Arctic ecosystem that is among the most vital in the world.”

How did we get here? I’d suggest through a cruel marriage of two phrases. You perhaps never thought that two phrases could marry, right? And, that they can even produce babies, right? In America, anything is possible.

Once upon a time vice–presidential hopeful Sarah Palin uttered the now (in)famous phrase “Drill, Baby, Drill.” Also, once upon a time presidential hopeful Barack Obama uttered the now (in)famous phrase “Yes We Can.” These two phrases got married along the way, and will now produce their baby “Kill, Baby, Kill.”

Recently I was at a panel with Robert (Bob) Emmet Hernan, former New York State assistant attorney general. Bob pointed out that something remarkable has happened in the US during the past decade—it is stealing of the meaning of a phrase: “We must reduce our dependence on foreign oil.” Both Big Oil and the environmental activists seized upon that phrase. The activists wanted to reduce dependence on foreign oil and move America toward clean, sustainable energy, and create jobs, lot of jobs, along the way. Big Oil on the other hand wanted to reduce dependence on foreign oil by drilling every place in North America—not easy oil, but what resource expert Michael Klare has called extreme energy—dirty tar sands oil; oil in the deep ocean in the Gulf of Mexico; and perhaps most dangerous of all, oil in the harsh environment of the Arctic Ocean. Bob pointed out, “Big Oil has successfully stolen the phrase reduce our dependence on foreign oil.” That is “Drill, Baby, Drill” everywhere in North America. And, the Obama administration is going along with all those projects (and there is fracking also). That is “Yes We Can” drill everywhere.

That is how those two phrases got married.

But why?

Penny at the Pump Returns

In January the Obama administration rejected the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. The republicans complained about high gas prices and made the argument that the tar sands crude would indeed bring down price at the pump. So, recently the White House did a 180–flip. In a recent op–ed Jim Hightower writes that the republicans’ use of “gas price pain as a whip for lashing out at Obama’s January decision to reject the infamous Keystone XL pipeline” is a “cynical political stunt.” He continues on to say correctly, “The pipeline and the toxic crude it’ll carry across six states would do absolutely nothing to shave even a penny off of the price we pay at the pump.”

Each time Big Oil wants approval on a dirty oil project, they and their cronies in Congress and Cabinet creatively use “price at the pump” as the most powerful argument to fool the American public. In 2005, when the Bush administration was pushing hard to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska—the most biodiverse conservation area in the entire Arctic, to oil and gas development, they had used that same argument—we had high gas prices then too. At that time, activist Carol Hoover and I co–designed an ad in collaboration with Alaska Wilderness League, Gwich’in Steering Committee and The Wilderness Society that came to be known as the Penny ad. The text of the ad began with these words: “According to the latest data from the Department of Energy, if Congress lets the oil companies into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, you’ll save a whopping penny a gallon at the pump. And of course you wouldn’t even see that penny until 2025.” We used one of my photos of pregnant female caribou from the Porcupine River herd migrating over frozen Coleen River as the backdrop. It was printed full page in the New York Times, Washington Post and USA Today on November 14, 2005. You can see the Penny ad here. Because of the hard work of the activist community, we prevailed and defeated all of Bush’s attempts to sell off the Arctic Refuge to Big Oil.

Hightower is correct in saying that if we allow the Keystone XL pipeline today, it “would do absolutely nothing to shave even a penny off of the price we pay at the pump.”

McClatchy Newspapers reported, “energy experts say that the Keystone XL pipeline wouldn’t do much to lower gasoline prices. The recent price spike stems largely from speculators bidding up prices at a time of growing fear of future oil–supply disruptions if a war with Iran develops over its nuclear program.”

So why did Obama make the 180–flip? The obvious reason is that he wants to get reelected, and so he is going where the money is flowing (read: Wall Street, Big Oil, Big Coal). But it’s more than that—US has decided to stay firm on the coaley–oily–gassy path when it comes to energy, rather than make the hard choice of taking the path of clean energy and create real jobs.

Shell’s Dangerous Game

On February 17 the Obama administration approved Shell’s spill response plan in the Chukchi Sea. But why is Obama giving Shell the key to destroy the Arctic?

Unlike Hightower’s assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline issue—the usual Republicans pushing the Democrats argument isn’t true in this case. Despite tremendous opposition from environmental and indigenous human rights organizations, in 2009 when Obama was still riding the wave of popularity, his administration had approved Shell’s plan to drill five exploratory wells—two in the Beaufort and three in the Chukchi Seas. Then, on March 31, 2010 standing in front of an “environmentally friendly” F–18 Green Hornet fighter jet the President had announced a new energy proposal, which would open up vast expanses of America’s coastlines, including the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, to oil and gas development. BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster that spilled more than 200 million gallons of crude oil and extremely large amount of methane in the Gulf of Mexico put a damper, and the President did a temporary 180–flip. But slowly and surely his administration has been rubber–stamping permits after permits—for Shell. The government has not done a thorough Environmental Impact Statement; and knows full well that Shell does not have the technology or the preparedness to respond to a spill in the frozen Arctic Ocean, and yet, in approving these permits the administration is essentially saying, “Yes We Can” drill in the Arctic Ocean.

So the story goes, “Drill, Baby, Drill,” marries “Yes We Can.”

If you take a bit of distance from “price at the pump” and other bogus arguments, you’ll realize that North America is determined to stay on course with fossil fuel driven energy for this century, and avoid any significant direction toward clean, sustainable energy, and deal with the devastating issue of climate change—the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. That is a major crime against all species of this earth. In 2010, I wrote a piece, “STOP: Another One Hundred Years of Fossil–Digging in North America?” that you can read here. That nightmare is becoming reality now—Shell’s Arctic Ocean drilling; Keystone XL pipeline and consequently massive expansion of tar sands extraction in Alberta; and major expansion of the deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico—are all moving forward.

What can you do?

Right now I’d urge you to sign the Alaska Wilderness League petition, Tell the President: “Shell No” to Arctic Drilling.

And, fight, yes, fight we must against all those who like to steal phrases, and along the way steal the meaning of survival for all species on earth. It is possible to defeat destructive projects when a community fights and keeps on fighting. Just in the last two weeks we have had two good news—the New Mexico anti–nuclear campaign stopped after an eight–year long battle a Plutonium Bomb Factory; and the anti–coal campaign in Chicago after a decade–long battle shut down two Model–T–era coal fired power plants in a historic victory. I recently edited an anthology “Arctic Voices: Resistance at the Tipping Point” that will be published by Seven Stories Press in June. In the book we offer many stories and ideas of resistance–against–destruction. You can also check out the ClimateStoryTellers special series on Shell’s Arctic drilling here.

The US government continues to ignore what the Iñupiat people and the environmental organizations have to say about Shell’s Arctic Ocean drilling, so it is no surprise that we are at this historic moment when an Oil Giant has made a preemptive legal strike against these nonprofit organizations. Only two centuries ago the US government supported a policy that exterminated nearly 50 million buffalo in less than one hundred years and destroyed the way of life of the Native American communities. Will the US government repeat that today by sending Shell to the harsh Arctic Ocean and along the way destroy the rich marine habitat and the way of life of the Iñupiat communities?

Let us thank our colleagues at Alaska Wilderness League and other organizations who have been sued by Shell. Instead of backing down they’re speaking truth to power, as Cindy has articulated so well, “Alaska Wilderness League will not be bullied.”

[SoNotHer]

Subscribing...

[SoNotHer]

McDonald’s Trials to Stop Using Styrofoam Cups

by Paul Canning, March 26, 2012



25 years ago, a campaign started to get McDonald’s to replace its use of Styrofoam. In 1990, McDonald’s said they would phase it out but that only happened with burger boxes. Now they actually are testing paper cups in thousands of stores, following a shareholder resolution.

These cups don’t quickly degrade, fill up landfill and end up in places like the great Pacific garbage patch. The chemicals and waste used to produce them pollute and laching from them may effect health.

Conrad MacKerron, of corporate accountability group As You Sow, described the move as “a great first step for McDonald’s.”

“Given the company’s history of using high levels of recycled content in other food packaging, we hope that it follows suit with its cups and also establishes a robust recycling program for post-consumer waste left in its restaurants,” he said in a statement. MacKerron’s group introduced a shareholder proposal last summer, asking McDonald’s to consider alternatives to polystyrene. Last year, the Republicans in Congress fought a battle to get Styrofoam cups back in their cafeteria as part of the fight against the liberty-removing House composting program.

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/mcdonald...#ixzz1qJz7jFkW

[Passionaria]

Radiation update provided by Daisy Luther and co-author NinaO. This report was originally published at Inalienably Yours.

The mainstream media and the federal government will soon have the blood of the world on it’s hands.

Radiation from the Fukushima Nuclear Plant disaster in Japan is now actively in the ecosystem all along the North American west coast… even the sea weed is now radiated. The Vancouver Sun reported one year ago that the seaweed tested from waters off the coast of British Columbia were 4 times the amount considered safe. No further test results were released after the initial report.

The governments of the United States and Canada are not conducting tests for radioactivity – at least not to the knowledge of the public. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has agreed to continue purchasing seafood from Japan, despite the fact that the food is not being tested for radioactive contamination. Last November, independent testing in Japan showed 65 per cent of the catches tested positive for cesium (a radioactive material). Instead of refusing to purchase the poisoned fish, food safety agencies in both the United States and Canada have simply raised the “acceptable level of radiation.” We can’t go offending the Japanese after promising to buy their tainted goods, now can we?

After the North American governments refused to fund testing, oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass, along with Nicholas Fisher, a marine sciences professor at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and other concerned scientists, managed to secure private funding for a Pacific research voyage. The results?

Cesium levels in the Pacific had initially gone up an astonishing 45 million times above pre-accident levels. The levels then declined rapidly for a while, but after that, they unexpectedly levelled off.

In July, cesium levels stopped declining and remained stuck at 10,000 times above pre-accident levels.

This means the ocean isn’t diluting the radiation as expected. If it had been, cesium levels would have kept falling.

The finding suggests that radiation is still being released into the ocean long after the accident in March, 2011.

Less than two weeks after the tsunami and subsequent nuclear disaster, Michael Kane, an investigative journalist, reported, “In the wake of the continuing nuclear tragedy in Japan, the United States government is still moving quickly to increase the amounts of radiation the population can “safely” absorb by raising the safe zone for exposure to levels designed to protect the government and nuclear industry more than human life.”

The radiation has absolutely reached the shores of North America. Water samples from across the continent have tested positive for unsafe levels of radioactivity. The levels exceeded federal drinking water thresholds, known as maximum contaminant levels, or MCL, by as much as 181 times.”This means that the complete ecosystem of the Pacific Ocean is now poisoned with radiation and we aren’t being warned.

Samples of milk taken across the United States have shown radiation at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums. The reason that milk is so significant is that it it representative of the entire food supply. According to an article published on Natural News, “Cows consume grass and are exposed to the same elements as food crops and water supplies. In other words, when cows’ milk starts testing positive for high levels of radioactive elements, this is indicative of radioactive contamination of the entire food supply.”

The GMO Food and Drug Pushers Administration and the EnvironmentalDeception Protection Agency, instead of refusing to prohibit the sale of tainted foods and mandatory testing of foods produced and harvested from the Pacific Coast, have simply raised the “acceptable levels” of radioactive material in foods.

Clearly, the “it’s-all-for-your-own-good” government will not protect us, or even inform us of the dangers so we can protect ourselves, because it might dip into the pockets of the global elite, the nuclear energy industry, and the food industries. There is big money behind this cover-up. Refusing to purchase and consume their tainted goods is the best way to fight back, while keeping our families safe and healthy.

How can we protect ourselves? First, be aware of what items are likely to be highly tainted.

1.) SEAFOOD: Question the origin of ALL seafood. Fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean should all be considered to be poisoned with radiation.

2.) WATER: The rainfall and snowfall are all radiated. Do not drink any water that has not been filtered. The tap water that flows from your faucet has NOT been treated to rid it of radioactive particles. A recent report from the NY Times stated, “A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours …

3.) DAIRY PRODUCTS: Milk and milk products from the West Coast states currently have the highest levels of radiation in North America.

4.) PRODUCE: Leafy Vegetables, Wines, Tomatoes, Strawberries….all produce from California or any other West Coast State are also likely to be tainted.

5.) MEAT: If a animal eats any leafy vegetable all along the West Coast, that animal has consumed radiation, and is poisoned. This is any animal from cows, pigs, goats, sheep to wild deer and other game.

If you eat the above foods from areas with high radiation levels, you are eating radiation and feeding it to your children. Slowly the radiation levels within your body will build up. This is PERMANENT.

Infant mortality rates across the United States have increased by more than 35% since the nuclear disaster, according to a court statement by Dr. with independent scientist Leuren Moret, MA, PhD. A study published in The International Journal of Medicine indicates that more than 20,000 deaths right here in North America can be directly attributed to the release of radioactive material from Fukushima.

Radioactive isotopes of the type released from Fukushima have a half life of 30,000 years. This means that we must permanently change the way we prepare our food.

Wash your food with soap and rinse it in filtered water.
Be aware of the origins of your vegetables, fish, game and seafood.
Keep abreast of radiation levels to help monitor where your food is acquired.
Use only filtered water for drinking, cooking and ice.
Check in tomorrow at Inalienably Yours to read more about our increasingly toxic land and the intentional poisoning of the United States.

[Glenn]

The Drought Of 2012

Here's the drought map updated weekly
http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/monitor.html
Instead of July it looks like September here with leaves falling and brown lawns. Even the bugs are dying of thirst, so they eat everything the drought does'nt kill. Even the bee's are starving for nectar and are raiding each other's hives and getting more aggressive near their own. The commercial crops are looking miserable. and the price will go up. Corn is already at a high price due to using it for ethanol. You'd think Congress would drop the ethanol mandate when it gets too high. Natural gas is getting a little cheaper though due to fracking.

[Hollylane]

Efforts to save grounded Shell Arctic rig postponed


Attempts to rescue a Shell drill rig grounded off the Alaskan coast have been delayed because of high seas and strong winds.

The rig, named Kulluk, ran aground on Monday after drifting in stormy weather as it was being towed.

The rig is grounded on the south-east side of Sitkalidak Island.

The US Coast Guard said the rig, carrying about 143,000 gallons of diesel and about 12,000 gallons of other oil products, appears stable.

A Coast Guard plane and helicopter flew over the Kulluk on Tuesday to assess the rig and said it did not appear to be leaking.

"There is no sign of a release of any product," Coast Guard Capt Paul Mehler said.

He said a team made up of Shell, Coast Guard and local officials aimed to get salvagers aboard the Kulluk to assess it and then refloat the rig.
Endangered species

Shell has said that the design of the Kulluk - with fuel tanks isolated in the centre of the vessel and encased in heavy steel - means that a significant spill is unlikely.

However, spill response equipment was being prepared in the event of a leak in the area which is home to at least two endangered species, as well as harbour seals, salmon and sea lions.

Environmentalists have said the incident illustrates the risk of drilling for oil in a fragile region.


"Shell and its contractors are no match for Alaska's weather and sea conditions either during drilling operations or during transit," Lois Epstein, Arctic program director for The Wilderness Society told Reuters.

The rig was being moved for maintenance and upgrades when it broke away from one of its tow-lines on Monday afternoon.

Its 18-member crew had already been evacuated by the Coast Guard on Saturday because of the risk of storms.

Sean Churchfield, operations manager for Shell Alaska, could not explain why the Kulluk had been caught in the weather.


"I can't give you a specific answer, but I do not believe we would want to tow it in these sorts of conditions," he said.

[femmeInterrupted]

Hope it's Ok to post this here. I definitely consider it to be a world issue. It's such an emotional trigger for me, because something about dolphins are so sentient.
I can't believe Japan won the bid to host the 2016 summer Olympics with the Dolphin slaughters still going on.
WTF.




http://www.opsociety.org/issues/dolp...ghter-in-taiji

http://savejapandolphins.org

[Toughy]

San Francisco Experiencing Driest Start To Year Since 1850s

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...r-since-1850s/

[femmeInterrupted]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...llowed-plastic

[Hollylane]

Logging Bill Passes House With Democrats Joining GOP To Cut Rural Education Funding



WASHINGTON -- The partisan drama surrounding the House GOP's defund-Obamacare bill on Friday obscured the passage of another piece of legislation with modest bipartisan support. Shortly after the Obamacare vote, the House approved a logging bill that would effectively privatize broad swaths of national forest land, mandate the logging of national forests, and cut education funding for some rural schools.

The bill, aggressively opposed by environmental groups and President Barack Obama, passed with bipartisan support by a vote of 244-172, with 17 Democrats joining 227 Republicans to approve it. Democrats were pressed hard to vote for the bill by, among others, the National Education Association, a teachers union with 3 million members, and by the typically environmentally friendly Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.). Four Republicans and 11 Democrats did not vote.

The creatively titled "Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act" would require most national forest land with at least 20 cubic feet of available timber -- roughly one mid-sized tree -- to be designated as available for logging. The land would be subject to aggressive annual logging quotas, except for territory in the National Wilderness Preservation System and where federal rules prohibit the removal of vegetation. The measure would require at least 200,000 additional acres of national forest to be opened for development to generate revenue for local governments.

Obama has threatened to veto the bill. Every major U.S. environmental group views the legislation as an ecological nightmare.

"It's arguably one of the worst forestry bills our nation has seen in decades," said Ani Kame'enui, a Washington Sierra Club representative. "It overrides essentially all laws and regulations of 100 years of professional forest management."

Alex Taurel, deputy legislative director with the League of Conservation Voters, called the bill "extreme."

"Threatening a government shutdown over Obamacare isn't the only radical proposal House Republicans put forward this week," Taurel said. "Their extreme forestry bill would spur massive amounts of logging that would decimate forests Americans count on for clean drinking water, recreation, and healthy fish and wildlife habitat."

School districts that include national forest land face chronic funding problems. Land development is restricted in national forests, leaving little for the school districts to tax to fund local schools. For decades, funding for these districts came from logging.

After years of declining logging revenue, Congress switched to a different funding scheme in 2000, giving rural counties the option to receive direct payments from the federal government. Counties typically accept the direct payments because it means more money than a 25 percent share of logging proceeds. The bill that cleared the House on Friday will end the direct aid program after one year, leaving schools dependent on logging money.

The NEA and the National Association of Counties -- which typically support Democratic spending priorities -- joined industrial logging companies lobbying in favor of the bill.

"We refer to this as 'active management,'" said NEA's Mary Kusler. "We knew that this safety net was not going to last forever. So this is a transition bill from a safety net to a path forward."

The bill nevertheless would cut funding for rural schools and counties. County governments will see a funding decline of $70 million a year under the bill, with rural school districts losing $65 million, according to an analysis of Congressional Budget Office data by Headwaters Economics, a Montana-based economic research firm. While such numbers are minuscule in the context of the federal budget, they are significant for local governments, which have been forced to cut teachers and other government workers in recent years.

"You can't cut enough to make up for what they're getting from the treasury now," Chris Mehl, Headwaters Economics policy director, told HuffPost.

The American Federation of Teachers did not take a position on the bill.

The bill's promises of new forest fire prevention policies helped persuade some Democrats to cross the aisle. Ten of the 17 Democrats who voted for the bill come from Western states susceptible to wildfires. DeFazio authored a provision that would exempt land in 18 Oregon counties from federal environmental laws, allowing higher logging revenues. The Sierra Club, Earthjustice, Defenders of Wildlife and other groups said DeFazio's bill would "privatize" national forest land by exempting it from federal regulations and turning it over to industrial production. A DeFazio representative was not available for comment.

"It makes no sense from a conservation standpoint and it makes no sense from a community standpoint," said Rebecca Judd, legislative counsel for Earthjustice. Judd called the bill "one of the most terrible pieces of forest legislation that we've seen in a long time."

Even the anti-wildfire provisions pose problems for environmentalists, who argued that the bill is an irresponsible version of a decade-old GOP bill signed into law by President George W. Bush. That legislation gave the government wide authority to engage in logging on public land for fire prevention purposes, but targeted projects that would protect communities most in danger of wildfires and included safeguards for ecologically sensitive areas.

U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell told a congressional committee hearing April 11 there was no need for more laws addressing wildfires. DeFazio asked Tidwell if the forest service was impeded by any environmental law constraints or budgetary concerns. Tidwell replied: "It's a capacity issue right now."

DeFazio responded: "So it's a budgetary constraint. You don't have enough money to do the projects, the projects you could do under the existing laws … Is that correct?"

Tidwell said DeFazio had it right. The Forest Service just needed more funding.

[Cin]

Greenpeace Activists May Be Charged with Terrorism After Russian Coastguard Storms Ship in Arctic
Activists trying to stop the work of an oil rig in Arctic waters are being held on board at gunpoint.


Jumping from helicopters and slithering down ropes, more than a dozen armed Russian coastguard workers boarded a Greenpeace ship and took custody of the activists on board, to stop them from disrupting the work of a controversial oil rig.

After a scuffle between the activists and the Russian security forces, the 29 activists, including six British nationals, are apparently being held on board at gunpoint, while the ship is forcibly towed to the Arctic port of Murmansk.

The Russian coastguard, which is controlled by the FSB security services, boarded the Arctic Sunrise late on Thursday night near Prirazlomnaya, a drilling platform in the Pechora Sea, close to the Novaya Zemlya archipelago.

The activists were protesting against the rig, operated by the Russian energy giant Gazprom, which is due to come online soon, and had attempted to climb aboard it and stop work.

The ship's crew remain in the custody of armed Russian security forces and could be charged with terrorism.

The FSB said it had been tracking the vessel since it left the Norwegian port of Kirkenes last Saturday, and turned off its radio signals. Once the ship had changed course and began heading for the Prirazlomnaya platform, the FSB decided to act. Warning shots were fired and two climbers on the rig were arrested earlier in the week.

When the ship's captain refused to turn back or respond to commands on Thursday, the FSB said it took the decision to act. About 15 armed men boarded the boat via helicopter, according to activists on board.

Ben Ayliffe, the head of Greenpeace International's Arctic oil campaign, said he was speaking to one of the activists via satellite phone during the storming, and could hear shouts and banging.

"They used violence against some of us. They were hitting people, kicking people down, pushing people," Faiza Oulahsen, one of the activists aboard the ship, said in a call to Reuters on Thursday evening.

Nothing has been heard from the activists since. The Russian coastguard said that the ship's captain was refusing to operate the ship, so an official boat was towing the Arctic Sunrise west towards Murmansk.

Greenpeace insists the ship was in international waters when it was boarded, and said there had been no formal notification of possible charges, nor offers of access to legal or consular assistance. The ship was 34 nautical miles from the closest Russian shore, according to the activists, which would put it in an area known as the Exclusive Economic Zone of Russia but not in the country's territorial waters.

The FSB said it was co-ordinating actions with the foreign ministry, Gazprom and oil company Rosneft "to protect the safety of the crew on the platform and defend the interests of the Russian Federation in the Arctic region".

The regional press office of the FSB in Murmansk told Russian agencies that it had received information from representatives of the Prirazlomnaya platform earlier in the week that they feared a terrorist act was about to be carried out, and said that activists were approaching the rig with an "unidentified object that looks like an explosive device". Greenpeace claimed this was disingenuous, as its "safety pod" is brightly coloured and branded with the organisation's logo.

Greenpeace has long warned that the start of oil drilling at Prirazlomnaya could have disastrous environmental repercussions. "The rig is a rusting hulk in the middle of the Arctic that is about to start pumping oil from the Arctic for the first time," said Ayliffe. "Gazprom has no way to clean up an oil spill if it happened, and it would cause huge damage to one of the most fragile natural environments on the planet."

The Arctic Sunrise ran a similar mission to Prirazlomnaya last year, and several activists again climbed on to the rig, but although they were observed by Russian authorities, there was none of the forceful reaction that occurred this time, Ayliffe said.

Vladimir Chuprov, the head of Greenpeace Russia's Arctic programmes, says the organisation is trying to arrange meetings with Russian officials to discuss the situation. A Greenpeace team is already in Murmansk awaiting the arrival of the boat, expected at some point on Monday.

http://www.alternet.org/activism/gre...tic?paging=off

[Cin]

Naomi Klein: Why Big Green Groups Can Be More Damaging Than Right-Wing Climate Deniers
In a new interview Klein says that it’s important to question why some big green groups have been so unwilling to follow science to its logical conclusions.


It's a long article. Here's a link:
http://www.alternet.org/environment/...limate-deniers

[Cin]

http://www.globalpossibilities.org/k...pipeline-deal/


A new study released Sunday concludes that Koch Industries and its subsidiaries stand to make as much as $100 billion in profits if the controversial Keystone XL pipeline is given the go-ahead by President Obama.

The report, titled “Billionaires’ Carbon Bomb,” and produced by the think tank International Forum on Globalization, finds that David and Charles Koch and their privately owned company, Koch Industries, own more than 2 million acres of land in Northern Alberta, the source of the tar-sands oil that will be pumped to the United States via the Keystone XL pipeline.

IFG also finds that more than 1,000 reports and statements in support of the Keystone XL pipeline project have been made by policy groups and think tanks that receive funding from the Koch brothers and their philanthropic foundations.

“The Kochs have repeatedly claimed that they have no interest in the Keystone XL Pipeline, this report shows that is false.” Said Nathalie Lowenthal-Savy, a researcher with IFG. “We noticed Koch Funded Tea Party members and think tanks pushing for the pipeline. We dug deeper and found $100 billion in potential profit, $50 million sent to organizations supporting the pipeline, and perhaps 2 million acres of land. That sounds like an interest to me.” Nathalie continued, “We all know they will use that money to fund and expand their influence network, subvert democracy, crush unions like in Wisconsin, and get more extremists elected to congress.”

[Cin]

Monsanto's Very Bad Week: 3 Big Blows for GMO Food
Why are Monsanto and the junk food industry willing to spend many tens of millions of dollars every year trying to keep you in the dark about your food?

http://www.alternet.org/food/monsant...blows-gmo-food

[Cin]

How Big Pharma’s Industrial Waste Is Fueling the Rise in Superbugs Worldwide

Pharmaceutical companies are fuelling the rise of superbugs by manufacturing drugs in factories that leak industrial waste, says a new report which calls on them to radically improve their supply chains.

Factories in China and India – where the majority of the world’s antibiotics are produced – are releasing untreated waste fluid containing active ingredients into surrounding areas, highlights the report by a coalition of environmental and public health organisations.

Ingredients used in antibiotics get into the local soil and water systems, leading to bacteria in the environment becoming resistant to the drugs. They are able to exchange genetic material with other nearby germs, spreading antibiotic resistance around the world, the report claims.

Ahead of a United Nations summit on antimicrobial resistance in New York next week, the report – by the European Public Health Alliance (EPHA) and pressure group Changing Markets – calls on major drug companies to tackle the pollution which is one of its root causes.

They say the industry is ignoring the pollution in its supply chain while it drives the proliferation of drug resistant bacteria – a phenomenon which kills an estimated 25,000 people across Europe and globally poses “as big a threat as terrorism,” according to NHS England’s Chief Medical Officer Dame Sally Davies.

If no action is taken antimicrobial resistance (AMR) will kill 10 million people worldwide every year – more than cancer – according to an independent review into AMR last year led by economist Professor Jim O’Neill.

Changing Markets compiled previous detailed reports and conducted its own on-the-ground research looking at a range of Chinese and Indian drug manufacturing plants making products for some of the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies. One of the world’s biggest antibiotic production plants, in Inner Mongolia, was found in 2014 to be “pumping tonnes of toxic and antibiotic-rich effluent waste into the fields and waterways surrounding the factory,” according to Chinese state television.

In India, where much of the raw material produced by Chinese factories is turned into finished drugs, various studies have found “high levels of hazardous waste” and “large volumes of effluent waste” being dumped into the environment. About a quarter of UK medicines are made in India.

The factory pollution mixes with waste from farms and sewage plants, providing an ideal breeding ground for the drug-resistant bacteria. Once established in the environment, the germs can spread around the world through air and water, and by travellers visiting countries where the bacteria are prevalent.

A drug-resistant bacteria first found in India in 2014 has since been found in more than 70 countries around the world, the report highlights.

Most major drug companies display a “shocking lack of concern” about pollution in their supply chains, Changing Markets claims. It is calling for companies that fail to demand environmentally sound manufacturing and waste treatment techniques from their suppliers to be blacklisted.

Large purchasers of medicines, including health services, hospitals and pharmacies should push for cleaner production processes, it adds.

Natasha Hurley, a spokeswoman for Changing Markets, said: “Big Pharma’s role in fuelling drug resistance is all too often overlooked when policies to curb the spread of AMR are being discussed.

“Our research has shown that the industry is failing to take the necessary action to address the threat of a looming environmental and public health crisis in which it is playing a key part.”

Modern medical systems rely on antibiotics to prevent people becoming ill with bacterial infections.

The drugs also prevent infection during surgery and treatments like chemotherapy, which can wipe out the body’s immune system.

As the bugs become resistant to the drugs used to treat them, experts fear more people will die of infections – and common medical procedures will become high risk.

Next week global leaders will meet for a United Nations conference in New York to discuss the growing problem of AMR.

Resistance is fuelled by the overuse of antibiotics in farming as well as in human medicine, a topic the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has been researching for more than six months.

Earlier this year, the Bureau analysed figures released by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate, which regulates what drugs vets prescribe for use in British farming and agriculture, and revealed a significant increase in sales of some critically important antibiotics.

A “critically important” antibiotic is one which is either the sole treatment option or one of few alternatives for a serious infectious disease in humans.

They also treat diseases humans can catch from non-human sources such as animals, water, food or the environment, including some drug-resistant diseases.

The rise in sales of critically important antibiotics is happening despite the fact it is now known that resistant forms of certain food poisoning illnesses, including campylobacter, and some variations of the superbug MRSA, are directly linked to antibiotic use on farms.

In April, the Bureau revealed growing levels of resistance among campylobacter bacteria, which is commonly found in supermarket chickens. The bug infects up to 300,000 people in the UK each year, hospitalising about 1,000 and killing about 100.

Previously unpublished data collated by Public Health England showed almost one in two of all human campylobacter cases tested in England was resistant to the antibiotic ciprofloxacin.

Ciprofloxacin is one of several drugs doctors can turn to when victims of food poisoning develop complications, and is also used to treat other conditions such as urinary tract infections.

Responding the EPHA and Changing Markets’ report, Emma Rose from the campaign group the Alliance to Save our Antibiotics said: “Today’s briefing casts light on how big polluting factories are fueling the emergence of drug resistant bacteria.

“With prescribers of both human and veterinary medicine increasingly urged to take action on antibiotics, the pharmaceutical industry must now play its part in tackling this crisis.”

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.co...ugs-worldwide/

[MysticOceansFL]

I'm really worried about the Dekota Indians and how they are being treated just because they want too protect the sacret ground bariels there. :-(

[Kätzchen]

It looks like Ecotoxicology scientists and researchers found tons of trash on an deserted island in the South Pacific; yet the island is uninhabited by human's, yet the human footprint of tons of trash wash up on the shores daily.

https://weather.com/science/environm...istine-garbage

[Kätzchen]

Just the other day, scientists studying a super volcano issue, over on the Italian coastline of Naples, Italy said that the 24 crater Caldera might likely explode and wipe out millions of people nearby. They don't know when it will happen, but there is a lot of red flags present in the environment, that point to the fact that the explosion will happen soon.

https://weather.com/science/nature/n...-campi-flegrei