PA Attorney General & Staff @ Marsh Creek State Park

From an Article by Bill Rettew, Reading Eagle, October 5, 2021

UPPER UWCHLAN — Mariner East 2 pipeline builder Sunoco/Energy Transfer had been charged with 48 counts of environmental crimes, state Attorney General Josh Shapiro said Tuesday at Marsh Creek State Park in Chester County, a few miles east of Berks County.

A grand jury reviewed evidence during an 18-month investigation regarding allegations of violations of the Clean Streams Law and related laws. The attorney general told reporters and an audience of about 20 impacted residents that the state’s power was “limited,” and the pipeline builder might face monetary fines through a trial; no one would likely be arrested.

“We charged everywhere we could possibly charge,” Shapiro said. He also said that only the Department of Environmental Protection has the power to pull construction permits.

Construction was stopped at the lake following an August 2020 discharge in excess of 21,000 gallons, with 33 acres of the watershed still closed to the public.

Shapiro noted while standing in front of a podium with a banner that read, Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General/Environmental Crimes Section, that the state Constitution guarantees Pennsylvanians’ right to clean air and pure water.

The attorney general, a presumed candidate for governor next year, said that Sunoco/ET had not notified the Department of Environmental Protection every time a spill of drilling fluid occurred during high pressured Horizontal Directional Drilling.

“Energy Transfer knew but chose not to report until fluid appeared on the surface,” Shapiro said. “Many losses were never reported to the DEP despite what Energy Transfer knew. This happened all across the Commonwealth.”

Sunoco/ET was also charged with using unapproved chemicals which can irritate the eyes. The attorney general wants to set an example for other companies working in Pennsylvania. “If they break our criminal laws there will be consequences,” he said.

Chester County District Attorney Deb Ryan thanked the Attorney General’s Office for holding Sunoco/ET accountable for these “continuing and devastating environmental violations.”

“Although my office filed a civil complaint against these perpetrators to stop their egregious behavior, we made the referral to the Office of the Attorney General to assist us with these issues because of their vast resources and expertise in environmental law,” Ryan said.

Food and Water Watch organizer Ginny Marcille-Kerslake released the following statement: “The Mariner East disaster is Governor Wolf’s responsibility. He must stop this right now, and we will continue to fight to make sure that he does. Our communities should not be jeopardized so that a major polluter can have another pipeline to ship dangerous liquids that will be turned into plastic junk.”

Clean Air Council’s Joseph Otis Minott weighed in.“Residents have fought tirelessly to defend their right to clean air and water in the face of Energy Transfer’s ongoing abuse,” he said. “We welcome the attorney general stepping up to support them.”

As part of a joint statement, Chester County Commissioners Marian Moskowitz, Josh Maxwell and Michelle Kichline wrote: “Holding Energy Transfer accountable for their actions is long overdue. We are delighted to hear of today’s action by Attorney General Shapiro. Energy Transfer has shown itself to be a poor corporate citizen in Chester County. Now it is the Pennsylvania Legislature’s turn to take action and enact stronger laws that will protect our citizens and environment.”

The Mariner East Pipeline weaves 350 miles across Pennsylvania through mostly existing right-of-way from Marcelus shale deposits in Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. It will carry the excess from fracking close by to more than 40 schools, Chester County Library and nursing homes. The highly volatile product will be used overseas to make plastics.

xxx

MVP Involves Environmental Violations in WV & VA

From a Submitted Essay by Thomas Hadwin, Roanoke Times, July 18, 2021

I have read with interest the various community opinions about the Mountain Valley Pipeline. As a former electric and gas utility executive, I am very familiar with the challenges involved in creating the energy facilities we need at a reasonable cost and with the least possible disruption to our environment.

So far, MVP’s record of environmental protection has not been good. They have been cited for hundreds of permit violations and fined $2.7 million. Construction in the areas with the greatest potential for landslides, soil erosion and stream crossing impacts has not yet occurred.

In their June 30 opinion column, Cline Brubaker and Bob Camicia, former Franklin County Supervisors, argue that if the MVP were finished, the Summit View Business Park could draw new businesses and jobs to the area, benefitting the region and making a certain amount of environmental disruption acceptable.

Choosing between protecting our water, heritage and property rights versus increased economic activity is a false choice based on incomplete information.

The former supervisors said the MVP could be tapped “at no cost to residents.” This is probably accurate in the context of the way the connection was presented to the Franklin County Board of Supervisors, but it does not reflect the cost to Roanoke Gas customers.

Roanoke Gas told the Virginia energy regulator that Franklin County could obtain gas service with a connection to its existing supplier East Tennessee Gas. This extension would cost about $37 million for 40 or more years of service. Connecting to the MVP, which was routed through the Summit View Industrial Park, would cost just $6.5 million.

It looks like MVP is the better choice, but an important detail was left out. Roanoke Gas committed to pay the MVP $122 million over 20 years to reserve a small amount of capacity on the pipeline, based on the current estimated cost of $6.2 billion for the MVP. Two such contracts would be needed to equal the 40 years of service from East Tennessee. The gas is purchased separately.

Connecting to its existing supplier would save over $200 million compared to using the MVP. Such a connection could have been accomplished years ago and the added economic development would already be occurring.

Why didn’t it happen that way? My guess is that RGC Resources, the company that owns Roanoke Gas, wanted to make a bigger profit. They will receive about $211 million in revenues over the first 20 years as an owner of the MVP. RGC’s 1% share of MVP taxes, financing and operating costs would be deducted from those revenues.

It is claimed the MVP is required for us to have the gas we need. That is untrue. Existing pipelines in the region have expanded by more than twice the amount the MVP would provide. EQT, the nation’s largest gas producer, is responsible for about two-thirds of the capacity of the MVP. This requires them to pay over $620 million each year to the MVP for a pipeline they don’t need.

EQT’s chief executive officer told financial analysts that gas production in the Appalachian Basin will not be growing if gas producers want to remain profitable. He said they have all of the pipeline capacity they need to get their gas to market. The MVP just adds to the existing surplus of capacity and creates a huge financial risk for our largest gas producer.

We need to talk about the “whole story.” We can protect our environment and have the lowest cost access to the gas we need — but that’s not possible with the MVP.

>>> Thomas Hadwin served as an executive for electric and gas utilities in Michigan and New York. He lives in Waynesboro, Virginia.

########……………………########……………………########

See also: US EPA challenge muddles future of Mountain Valley pipeline – Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance, July 12, 2021

Buckeye XPress Pipeline will risk severe local damages going under the Ohio River

From Keep Wayne Wild, Athens, Ohio, December 16, 2019
.
.
OEPA Meeting on 401 Water Quality Certification THIS WEDNESDAY IN Jackson, Ohio.

We just got word that the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) will be holding a meeting in Jackson, Ohio THIS WED Dec 18 at 6pm. If you’re able to attend, please show up! You can see the OEPA announcement below. For more information, contact Jessica Johnson at OEPA: jessica.johnson@epa.ohio.gov

Buckeye Xpress — 401 Water Quality Certification
Division of Surface Water – Jackson County
Wednesday, December 18, 2019, 6:00 PM

Jackson City Middle School
21 Tropic Street
Jackson, Ohio 45640

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
12/5/19
PUBLIC INTEREST CENTER, (614) 644-2160
MEDIA CONTACT: Anthony Chenault
CITIZEN CONTACT: Jessica Johnson

Ohio EPA Meeting Set for Buckeye Xpress Project

Information Session and Hearing Scheduled Dec. 18

Ohio EPA will hold a public meeting to discuss the application for a water quality certification submitted by Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, for a pipeline project in Vinton, Jackson, Gallia, and Lawrence counties.

An information session will begin at 6 p.m., Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2019, at Jackson City Middle School, 21 Tropic St., immediately followed by a hearing to accept public comments on the certification application.

The proposed project involves the construction of approximately 66 miles of new natural gas pipeline, decommissioning of approximately 61 miles of aging pipeline, and the installation of a new lateral pipeline.

Discharges from the activity, if approved, would result in degradation to, or lowering of, the water quality within the Raccoon-Symmes, Little Scioto-Tygarts and Lower Scioto watersheds. Proposed degradation of water quality would be offset through appropriate mitigation.

Ohio EPA will accept written comments on the certification application through Dec. 26. Anyone may submit comments or request to be on the mailing list for information. To comment or receive information on the application, write to: Ohio EPA-DSW, Attn: Permits Processing Unit, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 or email epa.dswcomments@epa.ohio.gov.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Range Resources objects to Columbia Gas’ Buckeye XPress project as redundant

From an Article by Sean Sullivan, S & P Global Market Intelligence, May 1, 2018

Range Resources-Appalachia LLC, one of the largest holders of firm gas transportation capacity on the Columbia Gas Transmission LLC system, objects to the proposed 275,000-Dth/d Buckeye XPress pipeline project in Ohio because it would make some currently held capacity less valuable.

The Range Resources Corp. subsidiary struck the hardest out of several Columbia Gas customers that asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to participate in the Buckeye XPress project review. In an April 30 motion to intervene and protest, the shale gas exploration and production company asked FERC to deny Columbia Gas’ request for a Natural Gas Act certificate for the project, or at least direct Columbia Gas to accept the producer’s offer to relinquish some of its gas transportation capacity on Columbia Gas’ 1.5-Bcf/d Leach XPress project.

Range said part of its Leach XPress capacity is identical to the proposed Buckeye XPress capacity, and “without the LXP project, the BXP project is not possible or viable.” The Buckeye XPress project would make the Leach XPress capacity less valuable by installing “unneeded capacity” in the same market at a lower transportation rate, Range said. FERC authorized Columbia Gas to put the estimated $1.52 billion Leach XPress in service in December 2017.

Range said FERC should look closely at Columbia Gas’ cost estimates for Buckeye XPress, a “project that has no shippers.” The producer observed that the estimated cost of Buckeye XPress is $709 million, with an estimated $500 million automatically recovered through a capital cost recovery surcharge for mondernization projects.

Columbia Gas applied for Buckeye XPress on March 26. The pipeline company said the the project is designed to modernize its system and to prepare for growth in Appalachian production. The project would enable Columbia Gas to provide an incremental 275,000 Dth/d of firm gas transportation capacity by using replacement pipeline of a larger diameter. The developer would install 66.2 miles of new 36-inch-diameter pipeline and abandon 60.8 miles of 20- inch and 24-inch-diameter pipeline.

The project would take place mostly in Ohio, with a small bit of work in Wayne County, West Virginia. Columbia Gas asked FERC to authorize the project before Jan. 31, 2019.

Other companies, most of them Columbia Gas customers or potential customers, also filed motions to intervene. These included Shell Energy North America (US) LP, Statoil Natural Gas LLC, Duke Energy Corp. companies, Piedmont Natural Gas Co. Inc., PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC, and other gas distribution companies under National Grid USA and NiSource Inc.

The Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Ohio Environmental Council asked for a spot in the proceeding. They said they were concerned about environmental impacts, including effects on the Wayne National Forest in Ohio, and do not support the project as proposed. The Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, which represents agricultural interests that “oppose government entities taking prime farmland for public purposes” and want protection from the effects of construction, also filed a motion to intervene. (FERC docket CP18-137)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Buckeye Xpress Pipeline – SourceWatch, September 9, 2019

Environmental Impact Of Buckeye XPress Pipeline

In May of 2018, the Ohio Environmental Council, Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity filed a motion to intervene in a federal permitting process for the Buckeye Xpress Pipeline. The proposed 66-mile fracked-gas pipeline would cut through Ohio’s only national forest and cross 336 streams and 134 acres of wetlands, passing through 12 miles of the Wayne National Forest’s Ironton unit and across the Ohio River to West Virginia. It would expand and replace an existing pipeline and dig up 225 acres.

In June of 2019, The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) environmental assessment found that the proposed project would not lead to significant environmental impacts as long as appropriate mitigation measures were in place. In June of 2019, FERC accepted public comments on its environmental assessment. The Sierra Club, the Ohio Environmental Council, Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, and the Center for Biological Diversity, along with several volunteer and community groups, were among those opposing the project. The project would impact streams, wetlands, and farmland, and threaten crucial habitat.

Government of the people, by the people, .... and for the people

Opinion Editorial, Rev. Mitchell C. Hescox and Shannon Brown, Esq., York Dispatch, 5/23/18

The Pennsylvania General Assembly did not have the votes to pass yet more subsidies to the oil and natural gas industry before its recess.

The proposed subsidies severely weaken protections for our children, families, and future generations to benefit the oil and gas industry. Despite no public demand for such bills, the Assembly persistently plans to try again on their return to Harrisburg after the primary elections.

As pro-life Christians here in Pennsylvania — Rev. Hescox, the head of a Christian environmental organization and Shannon Brown, a public interest attorney — we strongly oppose these efforts. The companion bills, House Bill HB2154 and Senate Bill SB1088, maximize profits for the natural gas industry and bury the costs in the lungs, hearts, and minds of our children. The bills also cleverly shift the costs of cleaning up the industry’s messes to Pennsylvania property owners and taxpayers.

HB2154 and SB1088 place our children’s health and future at risk by:
>> Needlessly rolling back performance and community protection standards.
>> Unfairly weakening drilling standards and corporate obligations that protect the public and landowners.
>> Allowing drillers to spill millions of gallons of “brine, crude oil, drilling or frac fluids and similar substances” without any accountability under the Storage Tank and Spill Prevention Act.
>> Barring local communities from passing sensible ordinances to protect their communities.
>> Allow drillers and well owners to contaminate water supplies and then simply “replace” water supplies with water systems that the driller deems suitable.

Surface landowners, and their families’ property rights, may be significantly impacted because the bills:

>> Restrict landowners’ objections to drilling permits to only the well location and the permit’s accuracy. Landowners, at their cost, have only 15 days after application filing to raise concerns.

>> Bar landowners from challenging any waivers to the rules given to drillers, waivers that may allow gas or oil wells closer than 200 feet from homes and water wells.

>> Create unreasonable limitations on liability for the drillers and well owners.

>> Contain roadblocks to restrict landowners from recovering damage costs, raising health issues, or defending private property by nullifying landowner rights or by requiring expensive litigation or cumbersome administrative procedures.

Surprisingly, many of the supporters of these problematic bills claim to be pro-life. Yet, medical procedures alone do not define “pro-life” as Pope Francis, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), and Focus on the Family, for example, agree. “Pro-life” also encompasses life itself, the community, and future-looking decisions.

As Pope Francis insightfully wrote, “only when ‘the economic and social costs of using up shared environmental resources are recognized with transparency and fully borne by those who incur them, not by other peoples or future generations’, can those actions be considered ethical.” It gets no plainer.

It’s not only religious institutions that understand “pro-life” as caring for all life — so do many Pennsylvanians. In April, nearly 15,000, pro-life, Pennsylvania Christians boldly demanded standards for reducing damaging methane leaks caused by the oil and gas industry. The message: people care about their communities, share concern about serious risks, and demand creative solutions — not rolling back protections.

As pro-life evangelicals, we want children to be born healthy and unhindered by the ravages of pollution. A study by University of Pittsburgh researchers found evidence of low birthweight babies associated with proximity to unconventional natural gas wells in Butler County, PA, and another study in 2015 linked birth defects to methane production. Up to 40 percent of children who live within a half mile of natural gas production site are born premature. Knowing this, elected leaders still press to further weaken the already minimal standards in the oil and gas industry.

There’s nothing necessarily wrong with jobs or profits, but they must not come at the expense of our children and grandchildren. It’s time to put our children’s health first. That’s what we do as caring parents and adults. We expect the same from those who represent us.

### — Rev. Mitchell C. Hescox is CEO, Evangelical Environmental Network in New Freedom, Pa. and Shannon Brown is a public interest attorney in Clarks Summit, Pa.

Burbo Bank wind farm off the UK Liverpool coast

From an Essay by Rebecca Long-Bailey, The Guardian, Dec. 11, 2017

The climate crisis is the most significant issue facing humanity. Natural disasters are already displacing entire communities. More intense droughts are leading to unprecedented levels of food insecurity and hunger across the globe. This summer saw hurricanes, floods and fires affect hundreds of millions of people from India to Niger, Haiti to Houston. The UK is also vulnerable to climate impacts, with more destructive storms, prolonged floods, and heatwaves becoming the norm.

Our climate reality is increasingly unpredictable and daunting. However, it is also opening the space to collectively reimagine a different future for the UK. Fossil fuels helped ignite the first industrial revolution, but we now know that their continued use will threaten our very existence. Within the UK we have the skills, ingenuity and people to drive the next energy revolution, powered by renewables. For us to make this change a success, our politics must have environmental sustainability and social justice at its core.

This is why climate change is at the heart of Labour’s industrial strategy. At the last election, Labour pledged that 60% of the UK’s energy will come from low carbon or renewable sources by 2030 to help us meet the challenge of tackling climate change. Labour plans to achieve this mission by transforming our energy system by taking parts back into public control and exploring how we can ensure greater local control of energy generation and supply. We want to cultivate strengths in growing markets for green tech, invest in renewable energy infrastructure, reduce demand for heat, and maintain Britain’s climate commitments.

Two years ago, representatives from 196 countries met in Paris and committed to limiting global temperature rises to “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels, with the aspirational target below 1.5C. The UK ratified the landmark Paris agreement the following year, promising to “continue our leadership on climate action”.

Despite its green rhetoric, the government’s record is not good. Its Clean Growth Strategy even admitted that the measures it recommended would not fulfil either the fourth or fifth carbon budgets. These budgets are restrictions on the total amount of greenhouse gases than can be emitted in a five-year period by the UK and are legally binding; for example the fourth carbon budget covers the period 2023-27, and the fifth covers 2028-2032.

We should be over-performing on our carbon budgets, not underperforming. The most recent autumn budget even threatened the future of new renewable generation by not admitting any more new low carbon electricity levies until 2025, on current forecasts, while at the same time giving tax breaks to oil and gas firms. The implications of the new levy regime could be catastrophic. Without alternative funding, it may spell the end of much low carbon development in the UK. With the success offshore, this is the moment to be seizing the opportunity to develop other forms of renewable energy. The Tories continue to push fracking despite its unpopularity across the country. The result of Tory policy not only undermines our climate change obligations but means many suffer from the effects of air pollution and fuel poverty.

I’m joining 100 other MPs, across parties, to call on our pension fund to remove its investments in fossil fuels.

That’s why I’m joining 100 other MPs, across parties, to call on our pension fund to remove its investments in fossil fuels. Our words in Paris must be matched by our actions in parliament – our constituents expect nothing less. This starts, but by no means finishes, with where we invest millions of pounds through our pensions. But we need to open up this conversation beyond parliament to ensure a just transition to a green economy.

This campaign is the fastest growing divestment movement of all time, which has seen more than $5tn of assets divested across more than 800 institutions. Campaigning for our universities, workplaces, unions, and pension funds to divest is one important way we can help to build a more sustainable society. Parliament must play its part.

>>> Rebecca Long-Bailey is shadow secretary for business, energy and industrial strategy and MP for Salford and Eccles

Mariner East 2 Pipeline from WV to Delaware River

From an Article by Kirk Jalbert, PhD, MFA, July 26, 2017

ME2 pipeline and spills map by Kirk JalbertLast week, a judge with the PA Environmental Hearing Board granted a two week halt to horizontal directional drilling (HDD) operations pertaining to the construction of Sunoco Logistics’ Mariner East 2 (ME2) pipeline. The temporary injunction responds to a petition from the Clean Air Council, Mountain Watershed Association, and the Delaware Riverkeeper Network. It remains in effect until a full hearing on the petition occurs on August 7-9, 2017.

ME2 is a 350-mile long pipeline that, when complete, will carry 275,000 barrels of propane, ethane, butane, and other hydrocarbons per day from the shale gas fields of Western Pennsylvania to a petrochemical export terminal located on the Delaware River.

The petition relates to a complaint filed by the three groups detailing as many as 90 “inadvertent returns” (IRs) of drilling fluids and other drilling related spills along ME2’s construction route. IRs refer to incidents that occur during HDD operations in which drilling fluids consisting of water, bentonite clay, and some chemical mixtures used to lubricate the drill bit, come to the surface in unintended places. This can occur due to misdirected drilling, unanticipated underground fissures, or equipment failure.

What is Horizontal Directional Drilling?

An illustration of an “ideal” horizontal directional drilling boring operation is seen in the first graphic below (image source). The second image shows what happens when HDDs go wrong (image source).

Mapping Inadvertent Returns

me2_ir_legendThe Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) posted information on potential regulatory violations associated with these IRs on the PA Pipeline Portal website on July 24, 2017. This original file listed 49 spill locations. Our original map was based on those locations. As part of their legal filing, volunteer at the Clean Air Council (CAC) have parsed through DEP documents to discover 90 unique spills at these and other locations. On July 31, 2017, the DEP posted a new file that now lists 61 spill locations, which account for some of these discrepancies but not all.

Working with the CAC, we have created a map, seen below, of the 90 known IRs listed in the DEP documents and from CAC’s findings. Also on the map are the locations of all of ME2’s HDD boring locations, pumping stations, and workspaces, as well as all the streams, ponds, and wetlands listed in Sunoco’s permits as implicated in the project’s construction (see our prior article on ME2’s watershed implications here). Open the map full-screen to see many of these features and their more detailed information.

View map fullscreen | How FracTracker maps work

Analysis Results for ME2

From our analysis, we find that, conservatively, more than 202,000 gallons of drilling fluids have been accidentally released while constructing the Mariner East 2 pipeline in Pennsylvania since the first documented incident on May 3rd. We say conservatively because a number of incidents are still under investigation. In a few instances we may never know the full volume of the spills as only a fraction of the total drilling muds lost were recovered. A full breakdown by county and known gallons spilled is seen below.

A few important notes on our methods and the available data we have to work with:

CAC obtained spill locations from DEP incident reports, inadvertent return reports, and other documents describing spills of drilling fluid that have occurred during Mariner East 2 construction. Those documents reflected incidents occurring between April 25, 2017 and June 17, 2017. In reviewing these documents, volunteers identified 61 discrete spills of drilling fluid, many of which happened at the same or similar locations. Unfortunately, separate coordinates and volumes were not provided for each spill.
When coordinates were not provided, approximate locations of spills were assigned where appropriate, based on descriptions in the documentation. Two IRs have no known location information whatsoever. As such, they are not represented on the map.
Spill volumes were reported as ranges when there was inconsistency in documentation regarding the same spill. The map circles represent the high-end estimates within these ranges. Of the 90 known spills, 29 have no volume data. These are represented on the map, but with a volume estimate of zero until more information is available.

All documentation available to CAC regarding these spills was filed with the Environmental Hearing Board on July 19, 2017. DEP subsequently posted a table of inadvertent returns on its website on July 24, 2017. Some of those spills were the same as ones already identified in documents CAC had reviewed, but 29 of the spills described on the DEP website were ones for which CCAC had never received documentation, although a subset of these are now listed in brief in the DEP spreadsheet posted on July 31, 2017. In total then, the documentation provided to CAC from DEP and spreadsheets on the DEP website describe at least 90 spills.

HDD Implications

The DEP’s press release assures the public that the drilling fluids are non-toxic and the IRs are “not expected to have any lasting effects on impacted waters of the commonwealth.” But this is not entirely the case. While the fluids themselves are not necessarily a public health threat, the release of drilling fluids into aquifers and drinking wells can make water unusable. This occurred in June in Chester County, for example.

More commonly, drilling fluid sediment in waterways can kill aquatic life due to the fine particulates associated with bentonite clay. Given that HDD is primarily used to lay pipe under streams, rivers, and ponds (as well as roads, parks, and other sensitive areas), this latter risk is a real concern. Such incidents have occurred in many of the instances cited in the DEP documents, including a release of drilling muds into a creek in Delaware County in May.

We hope the above map and summaries provide insights into the current risks associated with the project and levels of appropriate regulatory oversight, as well as for understanding the impacts associated with HDD, as it is often considered a benign aspect of pipeline construction.

The Uninhabitable Earth — When Will The Planet Be Too Hot For Humans? Much, Much Sooner Than You Imagine.

From an Article by David Wallace-Wells, New York Magazine, July 9, 2017

Unbreathable air — We inhale not only oxygen and nitrogen, but everything else in ambient air. The air now contains 400 parts per million of CO2. If CO2 enters the atmosphere at the high level of the projection it will reach 1000 ppm by 2100. At that concentration, compared to the air we breathe now, human cognitive ability declines by 21 percent.

Hotter air increases pollutants. “An increase in pollution particles in the air of 10 micrograms per cubic meter cuts victims’ life expectancy by 9-11 years,” one recent study showed. 10 micrograms is ten thousandths of a gram. A dime weighs 28.3 grams, so 10 micrograms is one half a thousandth the weight of a dime!

By mid-century, Americans will be exposed to a 70% increase in ozone smog, the National Center for Atmospheric Research says. By 2090 2 billion people globally will be breathing air above WHO “safe” level. A pregnant mother’s exposure to ozone raises the child’s risk of autism, too. More than 10,000 people die each day from the small particles emitted from fossil fuel burning.

A metric called the Air Quality Index categorizes the risks and tops out at the 301-to-500 range, warning of “serious aggravation of heart or lung disease and premature mortality in persons with cardiopulmonary disease and the elderly” and, for all others, “serious risk of respiratory effects”; at that level, “everyone should avoid all outdoor exertion.” The Chinese “airpocalypse” of 2013 peaked at what would have been an Air Quality Index of over 800. That year, smog was responsible for a third of all deaths in the country.

Perpetual War — Violence goes with heat. Syria has experienced serious drought since 2007. The fight and the flight of its population are not due to politics only, but to the shortage of food, and terrible heat. It has long been recognized that interpersonal violence and war flourish in hot weather. Now the statistical correlation has been shown. When you increase temperature by half a degree, on average you see something like a 10 to 20 percent increase in the risk of conflict.

It can be expected that a planet five degrees warmer would have at least half again as many wars as we do today. Overall, social conflict could more than double this century. The U.S. military is obsessed with climate change. Droughts, food shortage, populations migrating, ocean rise, and greater violence with higher temperature make a very complex problem for them. There are 65 million displaced people wandering the earth now. When it is hot, suicides go up, crime goes up and people swear more on social media.

Air conditioning will not help because it is beyond the reach of most of the world’s population. Also it requires more energy, contributing to the temperature rise.

Permanent Economic Collapse — Neoliberalism the belief that economic growth will solve all problems. Crashes seem to inevitable, and many people even in advanced economies are marginalized. Now there is a school of historians studying what they call “fossil capitalism.” They believe the swift economic growth in recent history is not due to the dynamics of global capitalism, but to the use of fossil fuels after the mid 18th century.

Before that time, most people had a subsistence living. Conditions did not improve from one generation to the next. After fossil fuels are gone (assuming no other source of energy is used) the world will return to subsistence living.

Another group has studied the effect of temperature on economics. They find every degree Celsius warming costs 1.2% of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product, total value of all production of a nation). Since growth of GDP is in small whole numbers, 1.2% loss is quite significant. See here for the recent US record. The theory is quite complicated. Their median projection is for a 23 percent loss in per capita earning globally by the end of this century. This resulting from changes in agriculture, crime, storms, energy, mortality, and labor. The Great Depression lowered global GDP per person by 6%, for comparison.

Poisoned Oceans — There will be four to ten feet of sea level rise by 2100. One third of the world’s major cities are on the coast. With severe storms, a much greater area will be effected. People, industry, naval installations, farmlands, coastal food resources such as oysters and other shellfish will be affected.

More than a third of the world’s extra CO2 is dissolved in the ocean, making it more acid. Already coral bleaching is a problem in several areas, including the great barrier reef off the Australian east coast, the world’s largest. These protecting reefs contain much more wildlife than most oceans areas, some say one quarter of all sea life. Reefs supply food for half a billion people. More acid sea water will make it difficult to impossible for shell fish, which have calcium carbonate shells, to form their shells. The acid will affect other sea creatures, too.

Carbon absorption causes anoxic conditions, in other words, lack of oxygen, which destroys life dependent on oxygen, which includes most forms of higher life than microbes. Then hydrogen sulfide bubbles up as it does along the “skeleton coast” as it does off Mexico and Nambia. Hydrogen sulfide is extremely poisonous, making such areas prone to expand.

The great filter — Why don’t all of us see and worry about climate change? Because it is slow and we are psychologically adapted to react on a short time line. We get used to change, like the proverbial frog in water that is brought to a boil. It is hard to develop a sense of urgency for something that is not an immediate threat. Eventually consciousness will rise, but consciousness needs to come up in time to effectively deter what surely will happen on the present course.

More than half the carbon society has put into the atmosphere in all of history has been emitted in the last three decades! Some 85% has been produced since WWII, little time for science to discover and publicize it.

The fact that needed change gets into the pockets of some of the world’s most wealthy and powerful doesn’t help. There is a huge barrage of disinformation, and very effective political power being brought up to fight the rising consciousness of the public. This is particularly true in the United States, but also in other places where coal, oil and gas are an economic power.

How will it go? That’s anybody’s guess.

Discarded plastic accumulating at an alarming rate

From an Article by Julie Cohen, UCSB Current, July 19, 2017

Industrial ecologist Roland Geyer measures the production, use and fate of all the plastics ever made, including synthetic fibers. Since the large-scale production of synthetic materials began in the early 1950s, humans have created more than 8 billion metric tons of plastic.

More than 8 billion metric tons. That’s the amount of plastic humans have created since the large-scale production of synthetic materials began in the early 1950s. It’s enough to cover the entire country of Argentina, and most of the material now resides in landfills or in the natural environment.

Such are the findings of a new study led by University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) industrial ecologist Roland Geyer. The research, which appears in the journal Science Advances, provides the first global analysis of the production, use and fate of all plastics ever made, including synthetic fibers.

“We cannot continue with business as usual unless we want a planet that is literally covered in plastic,” said lead author Geyer, an associate professor at UCSB’s Bren School of Environmental Science & Management. “This paper delivers hard data not only for how much plastic we’ve made over the years but also its composition and the amount and kind of additives that plastic contains. I hope this information will be used by policymakers to improve end-of-life management strategies for plastics.”

Geyer and his team compiled production statistics for resins, fibers and additives from a variety of industry sources and synthesized them according to type and consuming sector. They found that global production of plastic resins and fibers increased from 2 million metric tons in 1950 to more than 400 million metric tons in 2015, outgrowing most other man-made materials. Notable exceptions are steel and cement. While these materials are used primarily for construction, the largest market for plastics is packaging, which is used once and then discarded.

“Roughly half of all the steel we make goes into construction, so it will have decades of use; plastic is the opposite,” Geyer said. “Half of all plastics become waste after four or fewer years of use.”

And the pace of plastic production shows no signs of slowing. Of the total amount of plastic resins and fibers produced from 1950 to 2015, roughly half was produced in the last 13 years.

“What we are trying to do is to create the foundation for sustainable materials management,” Geyer added. “Put simply, you can’t manage what you don’t measure, and so we think policy discussions will be more informed and fact-based now that we have these numbers.”

The researchers also found that by 2015, humans had produced 6.3 billon tons of plastic waste. Of that total, only 9 percent was recycled; 12 percent was incinerated and 79 percent accumulated in landfills or the natural environment. If current trends continue, Geyer noted, roughly 12 billion metric tons of plastic waste — weighing more than 36,000 Empire State Buildings — will be in landfills or the natural environment by 2050.

“Most plastics don’t biodegrade in any meaningful sense, so the plastic waste humans have generated could be with us for hundreds or even thousands of years,” said co-author Jenna Jambeck, an associate professor of engineering at the University of Georgia. “Our estimates underscore the need to think critically about the materials we use and our waste management practices.”

Two years ago, the same research team published a study in the journal Science that measured the magnitude of plastic waste going into the ocean. They found that of the 275 million metric tons of plastic waste generated in 2010, an estimated 8 million entered the world’s oceans. That study calculated the annual amount of plastic waste by using solid waste generation data; the new research instead uses plastic production data.

“Even with two very different methods, we got virtually the same waste number — 275 million metric tons — for 2010, which suggests that the numbers are quite robust,” Geyer said.

“There are people alive today who remember a world without plastics,” Jambeck said. “But plastics have become so ubiquitous that you can’t go anywhere without finding plastic waste in our environment, including our oceans.”

The investigators are quick to caution that they do not seek to eliminate plastic from the marketplace but rather advocate a more critical examination of plastic use.

“There are areas where plastics are indispensable, such as the medical industry,” said co-author Kara Lavender Law, a research professor at the Sea Education Association in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. “But I do think we need to take a careful look at our use of plastics and ask if it makes sense.”

See also: Plastic pollution risks ‘near permanent contamination of natural environment’

Plastics on banks of Anacostia River in DC

Action against fracking is growing in Canada

Fracking and Climate Change — Take Action!

The Council of Canadians, www.canadians.org/fracking, February 10, 2017

Industry officials and some governments are promoting natural gas as a “clean, green” fuel, but research shows that fracked natural gas can produce as much greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as coal.

What is fracking?

Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as “fracking,” is a technique to extract natural gas from harder to access unconventional sources trapped in rock formations such as shale gas, coal bed methane and tight gas.

(Hundreds of people joined the tar sands healing walk. Much of the energy produced by fracked gas is used to fuel the tar sands production.)

This unconventional natural gas requires more energy and water to extract than conventional gas from easier to access reservoirs and more porous rock formations. This is only one reason for fracking’s heavy carbon footprint.

Fracking and water

During the fracking process, millions of litres of water, thousands of litres of chemicals and thousands of pounds of sand are injected underground at very high pressure in order to create fractures in the rock allowing gas to ow up wells. Fracking operations deplete water sources, and have been known to contaminate groundwater with methane and undisclosed chemicals. Questions have also been raised about the safety of fracking wastewater disposal.

Fracking and emissions

Proponents of natural gas have said that natural gas is a climate-friendly fossil fuel because it produces less GHG emissions when burned compared to other fossil fuels. According to the Natural Gas Supply Association, natural gas produces half the CO2 emissions of coal.1 But that doesn’t make fracking clean! The lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions – that is the combined emissions associated with extraction, combustion, and methane and CO2 releases – means that fracked gas can be as dirty as coal.2

Fracking releases large amounts of natural gas – which consists of both CO2 and methane – directly into the atmosphere. In fact, fracking wells leak 40 to 60 per cent more methane than conventional natural gas wells.3 This happens when water is forced down into a fracking well in order to fracture the rock formations. Methane ows up the well and is released into the atmosphere before it can be captured.4 The leaked methane is called “fugitive methane” and has been detected using infrared videos. It is identi ed as different from naturally occurring methane.5

Methane in particular is a very powerful greenhouse gas. It can trap 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than CO2. Two Cornell scientists who have been studying fracking in the U.S. estimate that in the next 20 years methane will make up 44 per cent of the U.S.’s GHG emissions. Along with contributing to global warming pollution, methane leaks kill plants and trees, contribute to ozone formation, and causes natural gas explosions, which have resulted in an average of 17 deaths and 68 injuries per year in the United States alone.6

The future of fracking

Fracking is not a clean or green form of energy. Fracking and the rest of the fossil fuel industry is preventing Canada from reducing its GHG emissions and doing its fair share to mitigate the global climate crisis. Shale gas devel- opment can ultimately bring climate consequences comparable to coal over a century, and worse than coal over two decades.7 Rather than continuing to frack for natural gas, we should be looking for creative solutions to transition off of fossil fuels.

Communities are protecting water and the climate

Many communities are taking action against fracking in order to protect their water and mitigate climate change impacts. A dozen members from the Kainai Blood Tribe in Alberta blocked fracking trucks from accessing their lands.8 The Unist’ot’en in northern B.C. have built a log cabin in a fracking pipeline’s “right-of-way” and municipalities such as Burnaby, B.C. and Niagara-On-the-Lake, Ontario have called on their provinces to put a moratorium on fracking projects.

Take Action!

1. Meet with your municipal councillor and pass a local resolution banning fracking in your community.

2. Write elected representatives of all levels and demand they protect the water, stop emissions, and put a moratorium on fracking.

3. Connect with other local communities actively ghting fracking. Visit www.canadians.org/fracking to add your ght to the “Fracker Tracker” and to learn more about other communities that are taking action across Canada.

For more information about the Council’s campaign to stop fracking, visit: www.canadians.org/fracking

Sources:
1 Natural Gas Supply Association website NaturalGas.org at www.naturalgas.org/environment/naturalgas.asp#emission 2 Page 6 Par tt
3 http://www.scienti camerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-would-emit-methane
4 http://www.scienti camerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-would-emit-methane
5 Green.blogs/nytimes.com/2012/11/20/methane-is-popping-up-all-over-boston
6 Green.blogs/nytimes
7 http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/155101-report-gas-from-fracking-worse-than-coal-on-climate
8 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/09/11/alberta-blood-reserve-fracking-protest.html

See also: Fracking Across Canada — Fractivist’s Toolkit

Catastrophic conditions will prevail on Earth

Humanity has 100 years to save itself from doom, says Stephen Hawking

From an Article by Mike Wehner, BGR Blog, New York Post, May 5, 2017

While much of humanity concerns itself with saving the planet from the ravages mankind has inflicted upon it, one of the world’s brightest minds is already warning that we should actually be spending our time planning our ultimate escape. Stephen Hawking — the cosmologist, author, and physicist who holds more awards and honorary titles than should even be allowed — says that we have about 100 years until Earth is a big old pile of gross, and that if we don’t focus our efforts on colonizing other planets, namely Mars, humanity faces complete and total extinction.

Hawking’s warning that humans should start packing their bags comes as a result of the scientist’s belief that endless peril lies ahead thanks to overpopulation, climate change as a result of pollution, and even the threat of mankind building an AI or even a manmade virus capable of destroying us outright. Hawking has said before that mankind is done for, but his latest prediction is his most dire prediction yet.

In a new BBC documentary entitled “Stephen Hawking: Expedition New Earth,” the 75-year-old Hawking will attempt to prove that his theory isn’t as crazy as it seems. “Professor Stephen Hawking thinks the human species will have to populate a new planet within 100 years if it is to survive,” the BBC says. “With climate change, overdue asteroid strikes, epidemics and population growth, our own planet is increasingly precarious.” The documentary will be split into two 60-minute programs and will air on BBC Two before presumably finding its way to American television.

Note:  If we destroy planet Earth in the coming 100 years, there is no point of populating another planet because mankind would mess it over just as fast, if not faster.  DGN

• >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

How long do we have left on Earth?

Comments by Stephen Baxter, British Interplanetary Society, May 9, 2017

We have 100 years to move beyond the Earth or face extinction according to renowned physicist, Professor Stephen Hawking. He thinks humanity needs to become a multi-planetary species within the next century, revising his hopes for our species down from an earlier warning which gave us 1000 years. So why does he feel our time is running out even quicker?

>>> Stephen Baxter, the British science fiction author, is a Fellow of the British Interplanetary Society. Amongst his many books is the 2009 novel, Ark, about a desperate evacuation from an Earth in the grip of an environmental catastrophe. What does he make of Professor Hawking’s warnings? Hear the BBC Audio Tape here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p052d6g1