Coal miners ‘black lung’ and frackers ‘white lung’ are examples of such ailments

From an Article by Eglė Krištopaitytė, Health News, January 20, 2023

Climate change impacts all aspects of our lives, including our health. From inflammation caused by wildfire smoke to diseases-carrying vectors migrating to new areas, the threats associated with changing climate are here to stay. [It can get worse! See Paul Brown’s challenge.]

This past year 2022 was the world’s 6th-warmest year on record since 1880, according to the latest report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Millions of Americans have experienced the consequences of climate change firsthand, as the country endured 18 separate disasters, including hurricanes and droughts, damages of which exceeded $1 billion. Moreover, these disasters resulted in the deaths of 474 people.

In 2021, an international group of medical professionals suggested that rising temperatures due to climate change was the greatest threat to global public health. Scientists expect temperatures to continue increasing this year. In 2024, they could set a new global record.

In an interview with Healthnews, Juan Aguilera, MD, PhD, MPH, a director of Translational Environmental and Climate Health at Stanford University, explains how climate change damages our mental and physical health.

Wildfire smoke causes inflammation; wildfires also cause public displacement and property damages.

Aguilera says that climate change impacts different aspects of our lives. For example, rising temperatures prolong drought periods, leading to the drying of the forests’ soils. When weeds and bushes are not hydrated enough, the fires tend to expand and cover wider areas.

“Smoke contains many different particles that are harmful to human health, with some being small enough to go into the respiratory system and even to penetrate deeply into the circulation,” he told Healthnews.

Once in blood circulation, particles cause inflammation which, in the long term, could lead to heart diseases, stroke, hardening of the arteries, and even cancer. According to Aguilera, scientists are now learning that wildfire smoke may also affect the immune system, making people weaker against any other types of diseases.

The effects of climate change are also linked to mental health problems. For example, living in an area where wildfires may occur can be a source of anxiety. “You never know when a wildfire will occur, how big and wide it is going to be. You may be in danger and need to evacuate your home. Following the news also might be a source making anybody feel anxious,” Aguilera, MD, added.

Moreover, harmful particles from wildfire smoke may affect neurons and, therefore, mental health.

“As we learn more about how these smaller particles affect our entire bodies, we can also explain issues related to mental health,” he says.

Extreme climate events are more frequent now. Climate change also exacerbates extreme weather events, such as hurricanes and thunderstorms, eventually leading to flooding. This causes more humidity within the homes, which can result in mold, Aguilera explains. For some, mold may cause mild symptoms, such as sore throat, coughing, or wheezing. However, those with asthma or people allergic to mold may have severe reactions, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In 2022, flooding caused by Hurricane Ian led to a spike in potentially deadly infections caused by Vibrio vulnificus, also known as “flesh-eating” bacteria. Over 60 cases of infections and 11 deaths were reported in Florida.

“Mosquitos and other vectors are getting adjusted to conditions where the climate is changing. They reach areas where there usually aren’t mosquitos, ticks, or any other vectors,” Aguilera added. Researcher says that as climate changes, the pollen season is expanding to up to ten months; therefore, pollen allergies will become more frequent.

How to protect yourself from pollution? Air pollution is one of the drivers of climate change. In 2021, about 67 million tons of pollution were emitted into the atmosphere in the U.S. Unsurprisingly, research reveals more or more harm of pollution to human health. For example, a study from last year found that unborn babies have black carbon particles in vital organs, such as the liver, lungs, and brain, as early as the first trimester.

Another study demonstrated that women in their late 40s and early 50s who were exposed long-term to air pollution with nitrogen dioxide and ozone saw increases in their body size and composition measures.

So how to protect ourselves from toxic pollutants? Aguilera says that while not everybody will be able to move out of regions that are exposed to air pollution, we can take some lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the steps is to follow the air quality index, which allows tracking of real-time air pollution conditions on a certain day.

“Vulnerable groups, such as pregnant, elderly people, children, and people with asthma, may want to consider some personal barriers, such as wearing a mask. Depending on your situation, it might be an N95 mask,” he says. In addition, air purifiers may help to trap these particles and reduce the amount of pollution inside the houses.

Aguilera explains that in the United States, some low-income communities live closer to freeways and roads, meaning that there are higher levels of air pollution coming from the traffic.

“Some homes don’t have proper insulation, and because of impending climate change, people who live there may suffer from heat stress or heat stroke. Measures to protect themselves, such as better cooling devices or air purifiers, cost money and are not necessarily accessible to everybody,” he adds.

Researcher says that the first step in achieving health equity is an awareness that our actions do affect not only ourselves but also people in other countries. “In Africa, they deal with severe droughts and shortages of food because of how climate changes make soils less fertile in some areas,” he says.

References & Sources ~

1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2022 was world’s 6th-warmest year on record.

2. The New England Journal of Medicine. Call for Emergency Action to Limit Global Temperature Increases, Restore Biodiversity, and Protect Health.

3. The University of Aberdeen. Babies have air pollution in their lungs and brains before they take their first breath.

4. The University of Michigan. Air pollution tips the scale for obesity in women.

5. Kaiser Family Foundation. Climate Change and Health Equity: Key Questions and Answers.

Memorial to workers of coal ash cleanup in Kingston, TN

From an Article by Travis Liller, AP News, May 30, 2022

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — In 2013, the first of more than 200 workers who labored to clean up the nation’s worst coal ash spill filed a suit against the contractor, blaming Jacobs Engineering for illnesses they believe were caused by exposure to heavy metals and radioactive particles in the ash. Nearly a decade later, not a single case has made it through the court system.

As the cases drag on, dozens who believed their work for the contractor made them sick have died.

They include people like Ansol Clark, who arrived at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston Fossil Plant just hours after the Dec. 22, 2008, spill, and got to work. He labored long hours in the coal ash sludge with few or no days off for months at a time until he became too sick to work in 2013. He died last year from a rare blood cancer that he believed was caused by exposure to the ash.

“Ansol never lived to see any justice,” his wife of almost 50 years, Janie Clark, said. “He never did — on earth.”

Over the years, Jacobs has made repeated attempts to have the suits thrown out. The Tennessee Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Wednesday in Jacob’s latest challenge to the workers’ lawsuits. The company wants a judge to dismiss most of the plaintiffs for failing to follow a procedure outlined in the Tennessee Silica Claims Priorities Act.

The law requires anyone pursuing claims for exposure to silica or mixed dust to file a doctor’s report concluding that the exposure is a “substantial contributing factor” to the patient’s illness. For plaintiffs bringing wrongful death claims on behalf of a loved one, they must also show the worker was exposed to the dust for at least five years. Workers with lung cancer are subject to the five-year provision too and additionally must show that their cancer was diagnosed at least 10 years after their first exposure to the dust.

In court filings, Jacobs said the vast majority of plaintiffs either didn’t file the doctor reports, filed inadequate reports, or didn’t meet the time restrictions. For example, one worker died from lung cancer in 2015, less than seven years after the spill, so should not be allowed to sue, according to Jacobs.

Attorneys for the workers argue the silica law was never meant to apply to cases like theirs. The act specifically refers to silica, which is just one component of coal ash. The components they believe caused the worker injuries include arsenic, lead, cadmium, mercury and radium, but not silica. The law also refers to claims for very specific injuries — silicosis and pulmonary fibrosis — that are not at issue in this case.

In addition, the workers’ attorneys say it is simply too late to bring this challenge. The case already went through the first part of a two-part trial in 2018, when a Knoxville, Tennessee, jury found that Jacobs breached its duty of care to the workers. The jurors said Jacobs’ actions were capable of making the workers sick. Whether those actions actually did make them sick, and thus eligible for monetary damages, was left for a subsequent trial or trials.

Jacobs’ attorneys have said the company did its best to manage the cleanup in a way regulators said was safe. It has not been proven that Jacobs — or even coal ash — is to blame for any illnesses, and the EPA classifies coal ash as nonhazardous.

After the 2018 trial, the federal judge in the case ordered mediation, alluding to workers’ urgent need for medical care. Mediation was unsuccessful, but a new trial date has not been set as Jacobs continues to pursue legal challenges. Twice, the company has asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to find that it is immune from being sued because it was acting on behalf of the Tennessee Valley Authority, a federal agency. The court has ruled against Jacobs both times, most recently this month.

Doug Bledsoe didn’t live to see that small victory. Bledsoe was called to work at Kingston just days after the 2008 collapse of a six-story earthen dam released more than a billion gallons of coal ash sludge. The spill was so massive it knocked nearby homes off their foundations. As the sludge slowly dried over the yearslong course of the cleanup, it turned into a fine dust that had to be constantly watered down but still filled the air, especially on windy days, according to trial testimony.

Bledsoe drove a water truck there until 2014. In 2018, he was diagnosed with lung and brain cancer. He died two years later, leaving behind his wife of 38 years, Johnnie Bledsoe. The two began dating when she was 14 and Doug Bledsoe was her “whole world,” she said.

“Everything we done, we done together,” Johnnie Bledsoe said. “We raised cattle together. We had a farm together. All that’s stopped.” Last year Johnnie Bledsoe and Janie Clark received an American flag that had flown over the U.S. Capitol to honor the coal ash cleanup workers. Clark said it is the only official acknowledgement they have received of the suffering they’ve endured.

Before he died Ansol Clark built a wooden cross that he placed near the Kingston plant as a memorial to the workers. Janie Clark said she plans to go there this weekend to change the flowers, as she does regularly.

“I’ll be doing that as long as I can get up the hill,” Clark said. “I do not intend to let this be forgotten.”

>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>

See Also: Coal Ash Is Hazardous. Coal Ash Is Waste. But According to the EPA, Coal Ash Is Not “Hazardous Waste” ~ Jeff Turrentine, NRDC On Earth, September 6, 2019

Coal ash, a catchall term for several kinds of waste left over at power plants that burn coal, typically contains a number of substances harmful to human health—arsenic, chromium, lead, and mercury among them. Coal ash is incredibly dangerous. Short-term exposure can bring irritation of the nose and throat, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, and shortness of breath. Long-term exposure can lead to liver damage, kidney damage, cardiac arrhythmia, and a variety of cancers. Every year hundreds of American coal plants generate about 110 million tons of the stuff. Most of it gets mixed with water and stored in sludgy basins commonly known as coal ash ponds, which have an unfortunate tendency to leak or flood or spill, sometimes in catastrophic amounts.

A few days before Christmas in 2008, more than a billion gallons of coal ash slurry poured out of a Kingston, Tennessee, power plant, spilling into local waterways and swamping 15 homes after the six-story earthen dam that had been containing it collapsed. The incident remains, to this day, the largest industrial spill in American history. More than 900 workers were quickly dispatched to clean up the mess, a massive effort that took five years. When those same workers began to get sick and even die under conditions that strongly suggested coal ash poisoning, 200 of them sued the contractor that had employed them, alleging that they had been greatly misled about the dangers of their exposure. A Tennessee jury last November found that the contractor had indeed jeopardized the health of its workers through its actions, but the case is ongoing, and no monetary damages have yet been paid.

Despite the protests of many whose lives have been affected by this demonstrably toxic substance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has for years refused to classify coal ash as hazardous waste. Instead, the agency continues to regard coal ash as solid waste — the same designation, believe it or not, given to household garbage.

Destructive Frack Sand Mining in WI, MN, IL, etc.

From an Issue by Patricia Popple, Editor, Frac Sand Sentinel, December 1, 2021

First hand experience with silicosis and respirable crystalline silica dust is not too common of an event with lawmakers, politicians and governmental officials and others when it comes to issuing permits and sanctioning industries wishing to blast out and mine silica. A Michigan friend sent this video of Michigan Senator Tom Ward as he tells his personal story on YouTubeabout his experiences with silica and dust dangers.

He feels the need for greater oversight and avoiding practices that create the harms done by some industries which are polluting the air we breathe. He feels additional health and safety measures in the industry with regulatory standards would not only improve the health of workers but also that of people living near silica dust producing industries.

https://youtu.be/z-xqWByL_ew

The old film on silicosis entitled “Stop Silicosis” produced by the federal government and the work of many researchers including Frances Perkins, Secretary of the Department of Labor is still available for viewing. It is well worth taking the time to see this film produced in 1938 as 83 years have passed since silicosis has been identified and many states including Wisconsin have not studied nor listed silica dust as a carcinogen. Neither have they introduced standards for respirable crystalline silica dust. While appeals from citizens in Northwest Wisconsin were made at the onset of silica mining in Wisconsin, the rationale listed by the Department of Natural Resources indicated that the priority for study of this chemical was lowest on the list of concerns and that it would be too expensive to do.

Take a look at the film on YouTube. I think you will enjoy seeing this old film but also determining how relevant it is to practices still being used today…83 years later!

Stop Silicosis (US DOL 1938) : US Dept. of Labor 1938 : Free Streaming : Internet Archive

https://archive.org/details/StopSilicosis

In 1938, the US Department of Labor released this film aimed at preventing the occupational disease of silicosis. It was produced in response to the national outcry over the death of more than 500 workers at Union Carbide’s Hawks Nest Tunnel project near Gauley Bridge West Virginia in the early 1930s. That overexposure to silica dust caused this deadly disease had been known for more than 100 years, but many employers ignored workplace dust control methods. Sadly, almost 70 years later, hundreds of workers each year still develop this preventable lung disease. The current OSHA exposure limit for silica dust is based on science from the mid 1960s. Most of the information and prevention measures in this film are still relevant today.

>>> FRAC SAND SENTINEL | 561 SUMMIT AVENUE, Chippewa Falls, WI 54729

Children & Elderly at Extra Risk of Air Pollution

Fracking’s Air Pollution Puts Infants and Children at Risk of Developing Heart, Lung Problems: New Study

From an Article by Sharon Kelly, DeSmog Blog, May 12, 2016

A newly published peer-reviewed study concludes that air pollution from fracking puts people’s lungs, hearts, and immune systems at risk – and that the health risks are particularly pointed for young children and infants.

The study — the first to specifically focus on how shale oil and gas drilling affects children ability to breathe — concludes that starting in the womb, children’s developing respiratory systems are particularly at risk from five airborne pollutants associated with fracking and drilling.

“We conclude that exposure to ozone, [particulate matter], silica dust, benzene, and formaldehyde is linked to adverse respiratory health effects, particularly in infants and children,” the researchers wrote in the study, titled “Potential Hazards of Air Pollutant Emissions from Unconventional Oil and Natural Gas Operations on the Respiratory Health of Children and Infants” and published in Reviews on Environmental Health.

“While the rapid growth of this industry was undertaken without substantial public health research, there are now numerous publications clarifying health risks and, increasingly, health outcomes,” they wrote, adding that since 2013, over 560 peer-reviewed studies on unconventional oil and gas extraction’s impacts have been published, representing over 80 percent of the scientific literature on the topic. In other words, in the last few years, the risks from fracking have become much more heavily studied – and the results show good reason to be concerned about how people’s health is being affected.

Based on the risks associated with breathing air laced with the five most-studied pollutants, the researchers expressed concern about fracking near homes, day cares, and schools. “We recommend that at a minimum, one-mile setbacks should be established between drilling facilities and occupied dwellings such as schools, hospitals, and other dwellings where infants and children might spend a substantial amount of time,” they wrote.

But state rules generally fall far short of that buffer zone. There is no national data available on how many schools or childcare facilities are now within a mile of a fracked well, in part because there are no federal regulations requiring the industry to track that data. Each individual state sets different rules controlling how far well pads must be from schools – and those rules vary widely across the U.S.

All told, over 17 million Americans live within a mile of an active oil or gas well – but the precise number of children within the one-mile zone nationwide has never been formally tallied, and not all of those wells are the unconventional oil and gas wells that the new study specifically focused on.

In Pennsylvania, the researchers noted, over 53,000 children under 10 live or attend school within a mile of a permitted fracked well. A separate mapping project, conducted by a group called Healthy Schools Pennsylvania, discovered more than 40 pipeline compressor stations – notorious for spewing pollution into the air – within a mile of the state’s schools, and found that one school district that had over 40 oil or gas wells within a mile of its schools. In Pennsylvania alone, over 400 documented violations of state environmental laws occurred at wells located within one mile of a school or a day care, and 13 violations occurred at wells less than a mile away from a hospital.

And it’s not just an East Coast issue. In four northern Colorado counties, researchers from the Western Resource Advocates found 32 schools within just 1,000 feet of a fracked well in 2012.

“Our research shows that the current setback distances between fracked gas wells and homes, schools, and health care centers are not enough to protect public health, especially children,” Dr. Marsha Haley, an oncologist at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette after she authored a different peer-reviewed study. That study, published on Feb. 19 in the National Institute of Environmental Health Services journal, concluded that current set-back standards not only put children’s long-term health at risk from air emissions, but are also not strict enough to protect against risks from accidents and explosions.

Black and Latino parents may have particular reason to be concerned about the risks associated with oil and gas drilling and fracking, an investigative report by ThinkProgress in 2014 found.

“In California itself, 79 percent of the more than 350,000 kids who live within a mile of an oil and gas well are non-white, while 60 percent are Hispanic,” reporter Emily Atkin wrote. “Coincidentally or not, some parents of Sequoia kids [in a town where 82 percent of residents are Hispanic] have complained of their kids suffering headaches, dizziness, and nausea. More alarming complaints have popped up as well, according to Juan Flores and Madeline Pano of the Center for Race, Poverty and the Environment, who both work closely with families in Shafter: A 12-year old student experiencing epileptic attacks; a nine-year-old student diagnosed with prostate cancer; an 11-year-old student who died from a mysterious illness that four hospitals could not diagnose.”

“Community members are questioning, why are these things happening in this community?” Flores told ThinkProgress. “Why are kids getting sick?”

The new study, the most comprehensive review of the literature to date, comes on the heels of several in-depth looks at issues related to fracking and child health, including a December 2014 study linked fracking-related chemicals to infertility, low birth weights and impaired growth in the womb, as well as a litany of potential health problems after children are born.

“People really near unconventional oil and gas and fracking sites and those who work in the fracking industry have the right to know the chemicals that are being used that may pose health threats, especially to vulnerable populations like women and children,” Ellen Webb, energy program associate at the Center for Environmental Health, told U.S. News and World Report when her 2014 study was published. “Given the lack of study and understanding of all the chemicals that are being used, we can’t know the extent of the risks.”

As troubling as the new study’s results might be, they represent only the tip of the iceberg, since most of the chemicals used by the oil and gas industry for fracking remain gravely under-studied.

In part, that’s because little health testing is generally required under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the main federal law that covers chemical safety – including many chemicals used for fracking, a recent report by The Partnership for Policy Integrity found.

Out of 99 chemicals that researchers selected for review, only two had health studies available in the public docket (and in ten cases, companies claimed to have provided that information, but the health data was in fact missing or labeled confidential). Although the Environmental Protection Agency expressed concerns about potential health impacts in 88 cases, they only requested health studies for five of the chemicals – and went on to approve virtually all of the chemicals for manufacture.

“Chemical companies and the EPA are basically conducting a chemical experiment on the general public,” said Partnership for Policy Integrity Senior Counsel Dusty Horwitt.

And while there are efforts underway in Congress to revise the laws, those efforts fall far short of the mark, Mr. Horwitt said. “Chemical reform bills that have passed the House and Senate do not fix the problem.” Horwitt added. “Congress and President Obama need to fix the law to ensure that chemicals are regulated with rigorous testing and openness so that citizens can be protected and informed.”

Meanwhile, the risks specifically associated with fracking have begun to draw the attention of politicians at the national level.

“The toxic chemicals used in fracking are known to cause lung cancer and birth defects,” presidential candidate Bernie Sanders wrote in an April 18 op-ed. “If we are serious about safe and clean drinking water and clean air, if we are serious about protecting the health of our children and families, and if we are serious about combating climate change, we need to phase out fracking nationwide.”

Photo Credit: A children’s swingset with fracked gas well in the background on Carter Road, Dimock, PA.     See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net

Conaway Lake on Tyler County road

W.Va. wildlife land fracking could yield $6M, royalties

From an Article by the Associated Press, Huntington Herald Dispatch, November 21, 2014

Charleston, WV — A company has bid $6.2 million plus royalties to drill for natural gas and oil under state wildlife conservation land in Tyler County. Denver-based Antero Resources is offering to pay more than $12,000 an acre for fracking rights under Conaway Run Wildlife Management Area, state Commerce Secretary Keith Burdette said.

The bid includes a 20-percent royalty on what’s extracted, and the lease would likely last three years. The bid on the 518-acre wildlife area’s oil and natural gas rights was unveiled Friday in Charleston. The land is used for hunting, fishing and camping, and includes a 100-yard rifle range.

It’s the second time West Virginia has offered to let companies drill horizontally under its land. Leasing the land for the technique called hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, is a new venture for West Virginia, and officials think it could produce plenty of money during uncertain budget times.

In West Virginia’s first try at fracking leases, officials opened bids for 22 miles of state land under the Ohio River in September. Six miles are under contract negotiations and another 11 miles are out for bid or will be shortly. Seven additional miles are being considered for bid openings.

Environmental groups cautioned Gov. Early Ray Tomblin to reconsider the Ohio River leases, since they would allow drilling beneath a river that provides drinking water to millions of people. Burdette said the drilling would occur about a mile under the river. State environmental regulators would still have to approve permits for the operations. All drilling equipment would need to be off-site of the state lands, Burdette added.

Other properties the state is thinking about leasing rights for include: 131 acres under Fish Creek in Marshall County; Jug Wildlife Management Area in Tyler County; and 24 acres in Doddridge County.

No fracking contracts have yet been finalized, however. All the money from the state’s fracking leases would go back into Division of Natural Resources needs, like upgrades at state parks.

See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net