EPA Launches Environmental Fugitive Site
The Environmental Protection Agency launched an environmental fugitive website this week that lists the top criminals the EPA is tracking down. All have fled their local jurisdictions or even left America. This is the EPA’s version of the FBI’s most wanted list, but just involving crimes related to harming the environment. Some of the crimes that these horrible fugitives committed include:
- Illegal Smuggling of Ozone harming chemicals.
- Dumping dangerous chemicals and pollutants.
- Discharging oil into the ocean.
Some of these crimes are horrible acts against our environment. The list includes 23 of the top offenders against our environment within the U.S. As you can see, not only are the crimes listed acts that could harm the environment, but are extremely dangerous for us. They are dumping chemicals into local bodies of waters that could filter into our drinking water. All cases are bad, but Raul Chavez-Beltran is one of the worst offenders:
Raul Chavez-Beltran ran an environmental cleanup company in El Paso, Texas, that is accused of transporting hazardous waste from factories along the Mexican border and improperly disposing and storing it in the U.S. In one case, he allegedly stockpiled mercury-laced soil from an environmental spill in a warehouse.
Why? I just don’t get the decisions these people make as well as the horrible companies these fugitives work for that usually are just as guilty if not more. To make a few quick bucks and get away from actually spending money on producing items cleanly, they put out fragile environment in more jeopardy than it already is. The biggest problem with the EPA is that they usually only handle larger cases and are extremely under funded. They are only a staff of 189 investigators for the entire nation. It seems like more money needs to be focused on these critical offenders and making sure that they, along with any company associated with them, are prosecuted to the fullest of the law. If the government starts catching and prosecuting these individuals more, it could also prevent future environmental crimes.
The US Auto Industry Bailout Bill
I’m sure you’ve all heard of the enormous amounts of media coverage revolving around the Congressional bailout package for the US Auto Industry to prevent them from going bankrupt. The amount has change from $25 billion to $14 billion, but it is still a substantial amount the Auto Industry is asking of us to lend them. I am torn between the two sides of this issue.
Economic Stability
This bailout is just a loan to major auto makers of this country and would help provide stability for our economy. They are going to be paying back this money and there would be strict government regulations put into place to ensure that they start producing more eco-friendly vehicles including hybrid and all-electric vehicles. Another ramification is that if any or all of the top auto makers in our country went under, it would leave any already fragile economy is a horrible state. This seems drastic, but it could even push us into a depression. The ramifications of something like this happening could be devastating.
More Eco-Friendly Cars
I would hate to see our economy hurt even worse, but part of me wants these companies to go out of business because of their failed attempts at keeping up with the time. They have failed to show that they can make car efficiently and on top of that they haven’t shown that they can produce an affordable, production ready eco-friendly vehicle. If we do give them this money, will they really strive to be more innovative like many other small more innovative smaller auto companies? I don’t think so. I really would rather our country provide more loans to smaller American companies like Aptera and Tesla who are the leading edge of the auto industry. With more funds, these smaller companies could make a production ready car that would nearly eliminate our dependency on oil. Whether it be electric, hydrogen or some other type of energy to run vehicles off of, many would be welcome to the change.
This is an extremely complex issue that is a lose-lose no mater which happens in my opinion. How do you feel about this bailout bill and do you think these companies deserve this money?
Bush Administration Puts Engangered Species Act At Risk
A special “Midnight Session” conducted late last month could put many of the endangered species of animals and plants in our country in extreme risk. In order to meet a deadline of 60 days before the current administration leaves office, they are hard at work to finalize regulations that would eliminate federal wildlife experts from having a deciding factor if federal projects pose a threat to endangered species. This just leaves me scratching my head because this is one of a few instances in which this administration is trying to push out last minute regulations to post further damage to our already fragile environment ( Oil Shale Drilling being another ).
I did not know regulations like this could be put into place over such a short period, but they are going to go through with them. Even with heavy criticism from other lawmakers and environmentalists, the Department of the Interior is still going through with it.
The rules eliminate the input of federal wildlife scientists in some endangered species cases, allowing the federal agency in charge of building, authorizing or funding a project to determine for itself if it is likely to harm endangered wildlife and plants.
These regulations would also exclude federal agencies from worrying about carbon dioxide emissions that also pose thread to endangered species. At the moment, it looks like they are on target to meeting the deadline. If they do, it would make it hard for the new administration to overturn them. There does exist a Congressional Review Act that would allow Congress to overturn these ridiculous regulations, but has not been used often. Luckily some people in Congress are still fighting for the environment representative for the House said:
The House, in consultation with the incoming administration and relevant committees, will review what oversight tools are at our disposal regarding this and other last minute attempts to inflict severe damage to the law in the waning moments of the Bush administration.
What gets me is that the executive branch has this type of power without consent from the Congress. I just don’t get why our government is allowed to continue to pursue their own interests and fill their pockets and nobody seems to be stopping them. There seems like no good that could come out of a bill like this or the drilling of Oil Shale and regulations like these can be passed.
What are you thoughts on the Bush administration’s “midnight regulations” that throw away years of hard work to help protect our environment?
Interior Department Opens American Oil Shale Development
The Interior Department finalized regulations that would allow for the development of oil shale on federal lands earlier last month. These regulations are focused on a 200 million acre area knows as the Green River formation found in the western states Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. This area is known to have a vast amount of oil shale supplies. It is believed that the oil shale in this area could produce 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil, which could help eliminate our dependency on foreign oil. The drawback as you might have guessed is that it is considered to be one of the dirtiest sources of energy and is still in its infancy in terms of technology.
What is Oil Shale?
Oil shale is a rock material that releases a petroleum like liquid called kerogen when it is heated. It is formed from heat and pressure begin applied to millions of years of fossil marine life. This rock is known as the rock that will burn because it contains enough oil to burn without any processing.
In order to extract oil from shale is a much more difficult process. Currently the technology is not developed enough causing it to be an expensive. In order to extract a usable product, it must first be heated to an extremely high temperature. Oil then must be separated from the resulting liquid in a process called retorting. A more experimental process that saves part of the processing of this rock is to heat it while still in ground and then pump the liquid out.
Is it a viable option?
Shale being used for oil is nothing new. Mining and its modern production began in the early 1800’s mostly in European countries. Since then, very few countries including Brazil, China and Estonia, have really utilized this resource to extract oil from. As the price of oil has risen, mining shale has really come into the forefront for the US. Currently, there does not exist a technology to extract the oil from shale at a reasonable price. Also, the process emits 4 times as much greenhouse gases as the production of conventional oil.
Environmental reviews are required before federal leasing of these lands can begin, but the companies that will mine these lands will only have to pay a 5% royalty to the government for the first five years of production.
This source of energy just does not seem like the best option available for our country. To allow mining that would destroy beautiful lands in the West seems like such a waste when there isn’t an efficient way to produce oil from shale. I just don’t get the lawmakers in our government. It seems like the obvious options are right in their face with renewable energy, but they once again choose a horrible source of energy instead. The frustrating thing is that there seems to be no research into this resource to determine how much damage it could have to the environment. Would it be worth mining this dirty rock just so oil companies can continue their reign over the energy industry? Lets hope the new administration blocks ridiculous regulations like these that only seem to fatten the wallets of the rich oil tycoons in our country.
Permit for Utah Coal Plan Blocked By Review Board
The EPA approval for a new power plant to be built in Utah has been shot down by an environmental review board late on Thursday. The Environmental Appeals Board, an independent group within the EPA, rejected an appeal made by the EPA’s Denver office to build the plant as they said it failed to come up with adequate methods of curbing their carbon dioxide output.
The Deseret Power company proposed to build the 110 mW coal power plant was proposed to be built on an Indian Reservation by the company. A environmental group that pushed for the EPA to have the review of the permit is pleased at the results. Though this ruling may not stop the building of this and other coal plants, it will cause them to be delayed. Any delays could cause plants to not open at all. The ruling also could lead to permits already issued to be reviewed and possibly be revoked if those plants are not meeting the standards in place.
This could mean huge things for the alternative energy market in this country. Not only does it prevent an additional dirty coal plant from being built, but it could allow a renewable energy plant, like solar, to be proposed in the area instead. The biggest problem in this country is that coal has become and continues to maintain a large majority of our energy. Many plants still fail to curb the amount of carbon dioxide they emit as well as polluting our environment with dangerous mercury. Let’s just hope that coal plants do in fact get delayed and maybe many get trashed in place of renewable energy.
Maryland Environmental News: October 2008
Maryland is one of the most diverse states in terms of its geography as it has almost every type of topography you can think it. Ranging from the mountainous areas in the west that are part of the Appalachian to low marshlands on the Chesapeake bay. You can never stop finding new and different places to go in Maryland and still be amazed at how beautiful the environment is. That probably sounds pretty biased, probably because I have lived in Maryland for my entire life. There are many environmental issues present in Maryland and I just wanted to share a few of those with you.
Chesapeake Bay Pollution Reduction
Waterman from both Maryland and Virginia along with the Chesapeake Bay foundation are threatening to sue the EPA if they do not take action to reduce the amount of pollution in the bay. The Chesapeake Bay is America’s largest estuaries and has a wide variety of sea creatures including Maryland’s famous blue crabs. The EPA has failed to enforce the Clean Water Act, leaving the bay to continually worsen. The biggest problem is when Dead Zones occur that reduce the amount of oxygen in the bay. This can be deadly to many of the creatures in the bay including the blue crabs, fish and oysters. Not only does it put many fisherman out of work, but it also puts the many species in the bay at risk. The Chesapeake Bay foundation is angry that the EPA continues to push the pollution problems in the bay to the background. That’s why they have gone down the legal route to force the EPA to meet its goal of eliminating much of the pollution in the bay by 2015, outlined in the Clean Water Act.
Environmental Groups Cracking Down on Mercury
Three groups: the Environmental Integrity Project, Clean Water Action and the Waterkeeper Alliance are arguing that the Carroll County cement plant and a Western Maryland paper mill are contaminating local waters with mercury. They are two of the top five contributors to mercury contamination the state and unlike the other three, have no laws requiring them to clean up. Combined, the two contribute to almost 40% of the entire state’s mercury emissions. This is horrendous considering that mercury is extremely dangerous to the environment as well as our health. The paper mill did install $30 million worth of pollution control equipment late last year, but the results are not yet in on how this may curtailed their mercury contamination. The cement plant has yet to take action and only will do so if federal regulations are put into place.
2008 U.S. Presidential Candidates Environmental Views
The presidential election is coming up in just less than two weeks and it’s time to decide who you want to vote for to be our next president. A major concern that I have along with many Americans have is what will the next president do to make sure that our country becomes more eco-friendly. This includes eliminating our dependency on foreign oil and moving our country towards using renewable energy sources such wind and solar energy.
I am a firm believer in giving every candidate an equal opportunity, no matter if many believe that the smaller parties have no chance of winning. While researching the environmental views of all of the candidates, I stumbled upon a site called Grist that put together a chart of the top 5 candidate’s views on certain environmental issues. The candidates shown include:
- Bob Barr
- Cynthia McKinney
- John McCain
- Ralph Nader
- Barack Obama
Grist also includes interviews with candidates that are still running for president and those that dropped out of the race. I know environmental and energy issues are not the only concern for choosing a candidate for president, but it should be a major issue you consider. Depending on which candidate actually becomes president could make a profound difference on how eco-friendly our country becomes or if it does at all.
