Bush to Country: Choke on My Exhaust Fumes

Haze obscures a view in Virginia's Shenandoah National Park. (By David A. Fahrenthold -- The Washington Post)

More environmental madness from The Worst President Ever. Hopefully President Obama can roll back this cock-eyed plan quickly.

WaPo: EPA Moves to Ease Air Rules for Parks
Regional Administrators Decry Decision

The Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing new air-quality rules that would make it easier to build coal-fired power plants, oil refineries and other major polluters near national parks and wilderness areas, even though half of the EPA's 10 regional administrators formally dissented from the decision and four others criticized the move in writing.

Documents obtained by The Washington Post show that the administration's push to weaken Clean Air Act protections for "Class 1 areas" nationwide has sparked fierce resistance from senior agency officials. All but two of the regional administrators objecting to the proposed rule are political appointees.

[]

"The administration's staunch commitment to coal is so deep that they're willing to sacrifice our national parks on the way out the door," [Mark Wentzler of the National Parks Conservation Association] said.

If the EPA adopts the rule change, Wenzler added, his group plans to file a petition for reconsideration with the agency, which would allow the incoming Obama administration to reverse the policy. If the new rule is enacted, the association estimates it would ease the way for the construction of at least two dozen coal-fired utilities within 186 miles of 10 national parks.

Surprise, Surprise

I am shocked, shocked, to find out that Darth Cheney is running U.S. energy policy into the dark, oily ground.

truthout: Report Links Cheney Office, Oil Giant [ExxonMovil] to Global Warming Policy Shift

[P]ressure from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, ExxonMobil and others in the oil industry led the Bush administration to change course [and decide not to use the Clean Air Act to limit greenhouse gas emissions].

Environment 5, Bush Administration 4

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the EPA must regulate greenhouse gases, pursuant to its statutory authority to regulate pollutants. Hurrah!

Already the decision has had ramifications, as today EPA reopened the state of California's petition for an exemption from the Clean Air Act so that it can reduce tailpipe emissions by 25%. The petition has been sitting in limbo for two years.

Massachusetts et al v. Envivonmental Protection Agency et al, No. 05-1120 (pdf file)

For the environment:

John Paul Stevens, writing for the Court [appointed by Gerald Ford]
Stephen G. Breyer [appointed by Bill Clinton]
Ruth Bader Ginsburg [appointed by Bill Clinton]
Anthony M. Kennedy [appointed by Ronald Reagan]
David H. Souter [appointed by George H.W. Bush]

For the Bush Administration:
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the dissent [appointed by George W. Bush]
Samuel A. Alito Jr. [appointed by George W. Bush]
Antonin Scalia [appointed by Ronald Reagan]
Clarence Thomas [appointed by George H.W. Bush]

The decision begins,

"A well-documented rise in global temperatures has coincided with a significant increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Respected scientists believe the two trends are related. For when carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere, it acts like the ceiling of a greenhouse, trapping solar energy and retarding the escape of reflected heat. It is therefore a species--the most important species--of a "greenhouse gas."

WaPo: High Court Faults EPA Inaction on Emissions
Critics of Bush Stance on Warming Claim Victory

The Supreme Court rebuked the Bush administration yesterday for refusing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, siding with environmentalists in the court's first examination of the phenomenon of global warming.

The court ruled 5 to 4 that the Environmental Protection Agency violated the Clean Air Act by improperly declining to regulate new-vehicle emissions standards to control the pollutants that scientists say contribute to global warming.

WaPo: The Case of the Term Goes Against the White House

We Love Lists

Project Censored has issued its list of the Top 25 Censored Stories of 2007 (the stories you should be reading about, but won't).

#1 Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media

#2 Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran

#3 Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger

#4 Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US

#5 High-Tech Genocide in Congo

#6 Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy

# 7 US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq

#8 Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act

#9 The World Bank Funds Israel-Palestine Wall

#10 Expanded Air War in Iraq Kills More Civilians

#11 Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed

#12 Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines

#13 New Evidence Establishes Dangers of Roundup

#14 Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US

#15 Chemical Industry is EPA’s Primary Research Partner

#16 Ecuador and Mexico Defy US on International Criminal Court

#17 Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda

#18 Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story

#19 Destruction of Rainforests Worst Ever

#20 Bottled Water: A Global Environmental Problem

#21 Gold Mining Threatens Ancient Andean Glaciers

#22 $Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed

#23 US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe

#24 Cheney’s Halliburton Stock Rose Over 3000 Percent Last Year

#25 US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region

Via BoingBoing

OSHA, EPA & City Failed New Yorkers Cleaning Up Ground Zero

I missed this story on Sunday. The New York Times published a long article on the reason why so many Ground Zero cleanup workers now have lung disease. They didn't use respirators.

One thing that neither the Times article nor the excellent analysis by Confined Space point out is that respirators are safety issues themselves. They make it difficult for workers to communicate with each other. Therefore, employers must be especially vigilant when requiring their use, because workers aren't going to want to use anything that makes it harder to yell "Watch out!" and be heard. The worker recognizes the immediate safety threat of the difficulty in communicating; they don't necessarily assign the long-term threat of lung disease the same priority. Employers care far about the cost of the job than anything else. That's why government agencies, who are aware of the health threat, must be involved in requiring these safety devices. At Ground Zero, the government failed utterly, starting with Christy Todd Whitman, head of EPA, who declared the air around Ground Zero safe to breathe when it was, in actuality, toxic.

Anthony DePalma, NYTimes: Air Masks at Issue in Claims of 9/11 Illnesses

With mounting evidence that exposure to the toxic smoke and ash at ground zero during the nine-month cleanup has made many people sick, attention is now focusing on the role of air-filtering masks, or respirators, that cost less than $50 and could have shielded workers from some of the toxins.

More than 150,000 such masks were distributed and only 40,000 people worked on the pile, but most workers either did not have the masks or did not use them.

[]

From legal documents presented in the case, a tale emerges of heroic but ineffective efforts to protect workers, with botched opportunities, confused policies and contradictions that failed to ensure their safety.

Lawyers representing the workers say that there was no central distribution point for the respirators, no single organization responsible for giving them out, and no one with the power to make sure the respirators that were distributed got used, and used properly.

By contrast, at the Pentagon, workers not wearing proper protective gear were escorted off the site.

Confined Space: World Trade Center Recovery: Dereliction of Duty

The problem began with a statement by then EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman assuring lower Manhattan workers and residents that the air was safe to breathe. DePalma reports that "the agency's inspector general concluded in 2003 that Ms. Whitman's statement was far too broad and could not be scientifically supported at the time she made it."

Personally, I think DePalma's being a bit too nice. The IG actually found that White House officials instructed the agency to be less alarming and more reassuring to the public in the first few days after the attack than EPA officials originally wanted to be. And earlier this year, Judge Deborah A. Batts of Federal District Court found that Whitman had deliberately mislead the public when she reassured the public after the collapse of the World Trade Centers that the air was safe to breathe in lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. The result of Whitman's lack of concern were devastating for recovery workers, according to Dave Newman of the New York Committee on Occupational Safety and Health who argues that after Whitman's statement, employers "had a green light to say, 'We don't need to use respirators because the E.P.A. says the air is OK.' "

[]

But the real culprit here is the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the agency tasked by Congress to ensure the health and safety of American workers. And you can look long and hard at the Occupational Safety and Health Act without finding any exception for federally declared disasters:

As the magnitude of the recovery operation grew clearer, attempts were made to bring order to the operation. On Sept. 20 the city issued its first safety plan, and it asked the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to take charge of distributing respirators. In what would become a controversial move, OSHA used its discretionary powers to decide not to enforce workplace safety regulations but to act in a supportive role that would not slow down operations.

Previous posts:

9/11 EPA Victims (May 16, 2006)

First Death Officially Linked to 9/11 Clean-Up (April 12, 2006)

Have a Nice Day, Christy Todd Whitman (April 12, 2006)

Liars (April 9, 2006)

Too Bad This Isn't a Criminal Case. Christy Todd Whitman Should Be in Jail. (February 2, 2006)

Republicans to FDNY: Drop Dead (November 15, 2005)

Environmental Protection Agency Also Run By "Inept Political Hacks" (September 11, 2005)

Christy Todd Spineless (March 23, 2005)

Love My Prius

I am now the proud owner of a 2006 Toyota Prius, and have been for two weeks. It's a cute little car. Twice people have seen it for the first time and said "The Jetsons". If the roof was clear, I would look like Judy Jetson. But it's silver, and sleek.

The car has lots of bells and whistles, starting out with the dashboard TV screen. This is the most dangerous feature on the car, because it's very distracting. I have now learned to ignore it most of the time, and to be judicious in my use of it. The first time I drove the car I almost drove off the road because I got mesmerized. As an average American woman (not short!) it's just a few inches too far to my right. I really have to reach for the buttons on the right side of the screen.

When you put the car in reverse, the picture of what's behind you pops up, because there's a camera in the hatchback. The rest of the time, the screen controls the audio, climate, and what information you are getting. I like to leave the screen on Trip Information, which tells me what mileage I am getting, second by second, the average mileage, and whether the car is operating on the gas motor or on the electric battery.

Speed, gear, lights and odomoter are digital, on a screen deep under the recessed dash. At night, you have to turn down the color on the dash, or you get a green reflection on the windshield.

The seats are very comfortable, both front and back. I've had three people in the back without any complaints. The only downside compared to my Camry is the trunk space. It's a small car and a hatchback, so the trunk area is correspondingly smaller.

I'm averaging 49.2 miles per gallon, and that included two highway trips back and forth to the Catskills via the Berkshires. The car gets lousy mileage going up hills, but on the other side coasting down the mileage goes up again. Having that little screen in front of you with average miles per gallon makes me very competitive. I want to get my average up! So the car makes me a more careful and fuel efficient driver. I start more slowly, because on slow starts, the car stays on the electric battery. Stomp on the accelerator and you go directly to gas engine.

Ideally, if I am going 35 to 40 MPH on a level straightaway, the car would get over 80 miles per gallon, but as I live in the Worcester hills, that doesn't happen too often. The EPA mileage rating is 51 highway, 60 city; those are my goals!

All in all, I am pleased with the car and would recommend it to others. Plus it makes me feel like I am doing something, even if it's only a little, to reduce global warming. Or as Dick Cheney would say, conservation is a sign of personal virtue, and I feel virtuous.

9/11 EPA Victims

Angel Franco/The New York Times
Some of the people working in the cleanup and recovery effort after Sept. 11 wore masks, but the most effective ones were effective for no more than 20 minutes.

A good review of news reports of lung disease in 9/11 clean-up workers, who were told it was safe to breathe the air in lower Manhattan by EPA and spineless EPA head Christy Todd Whitman, from the best blog on the 'net for workplace safety news, Confined Space:

Confined Space: World Trade Center Tragedies Continue

Read the whole thing. Firefighters, police, paramedics, anyone who breathed that toxic air for weeks and months, now are fighting debilitating lung disease, from sarcoidosis to mesothelioma.

Have a nice day, Christy Todd Whitman.


Previous posts:

First Death Officially Linked to 9/11 Clean-Up (April 12, 2006)

Have a Nice Day, Christy Todd Whitman (April 12, 2006)

Liars (April 9, 2006)

Too Bad This Isn't a Criminal Case. Christy Todd Whitman Should Be in Jail. (February 2, 2006)

Republicans to FDNY: Drop Dead (November 15, 2005)

Environmental Protection Agency Also Run By "Inept Political Hacks" (September 11, 2005)

Christy Todd Spineless (March 23, 2005)

The Incompetence, The Corruption, The Cronyism: April 28, 2006 edition

I think Paul Krugman should have titled his column today "The Incompetence, the Corruption, and the Cronyism", but he called it The Crony Fairy (behind the TimesSelect wall; Middle Earth Journal has the column here.)

On the other hand, the history of the Bush administration, from the botched reconstruction of Iraq to the botched start-up of the prescription drug program, shows that a president who isn't serious about governing, who prizes loyalty and personal connections over competence, can quickly reduce the government of the world's most powerful nation to third-world levels of ineffectiveness.

And bear in mind that Mr. Bush's pattern of cronyism didn't change after Katrina. For example, he appointed Julie Myers, the inexperienced niece of Gen. Richard Myers, to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement — an agency that, like FEMA, is supposed to protect us against terrorism as well as other threats. Even at the C.I.A., the administration seems more interested in purging Democrats than in improving the quality of intelligence.

So let's skip the name change for FEMA, O.K.? The United States will regain effective government if and when it gets a president who cares more about serving the nation than about rewarding his friends and scoring political points. That's at least a thousand days away. Meanwhile, don't count on FEMA, or on any other government agency, to do its job.

I see the Bush MO for destroying government as follows:

The Corruption: Lie about your political aims (Compassionate Conservatism, Against Nation Building); cheat to get into office (Florida 2000; Ohio 2004)

The Cronyism: Reward friends and bagmen (Pioneers) with appointments (Michael Brown, Harriet Miers, Tom Ridge) to jobs they can screw up.

The Incompetence: Run federal agencies into the ground (FEMA, Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, OSHA).

Declare war and go home to reap the profits (probably to be employed in Iraq very soon.): Proclaim that government doesn't work, get lame members of Congress to support abolishing government agencies.


In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for. As for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican. H.L. Mencken

Have a Nice Day, Christy Todd Whitman

BBC (uk): Problems mount from 9/11 fallout

The number of people with medical problems linked to the 9/11 attacks on New York has risen to at least 15,000.

The figure, put together for the BBC, counts those receiving treatment for problems related to breathing in dust.

Many of the victims say the government offered false reassurances that the Manhattan air was safe and are now pursuing a class-action lawsuit.

[]

The apparent cause? The long line of contaminants carried by the dust into the lungs of many of those at, or near, the scene on that fateful day.

'Real' figure

One list of sufferers has been compiled at the Mount Sinai Medical Center. Its World Trade Center Screening Programme has 16,000 people on its books, of whom about half - 8,000 - require treatment.

A further 7,000 firefighters are recorded as having a wide range of medical problems, producing a total of 15,000. But the overall numbers affected could easily be far higher.

[]

Many of the people now suffering were sent to Ground Zero to help search for survivors. Others volunteered. Still more just happened to be living or working in the area.

The latter feel particularly aggrieved, even betrayed.

In the days following the attacks, the head [CHRISTY TODD WHITMAN] of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared that monitoring operations had proved the "air was safe to breathe". And with that reassurance, the authorities reopened the globally important financial hub of Wall Street.

At the time it was seen as a critical morale-booster to a wounded nation.

Yet now the federal courts have allowed a class-action lawsuit to be filed against those very authorities.

Last month, a judge described the EPA's reassurances as "misleading" and "shocking the conscience". The legal process could last years.

Historical note: The phrase "Have a nice day" is taken from the classic Doonesbury cartoon from the early 1970s, summarizing the murders of four students at Kent State after Nixon's Attorney General, John Mitchell, had ordered the National Guard in to Kent State. The final square of that cartoon read "Have a nice day, John Mitchell". I probably have it somewhere in a box. It is embedded in my brain, along with "Dare to be great, Ms. Caucus" and "But this war had such promise."

Liars

DEADLY FIBERS: This shirt was worn by Yeheda Kaploun at Ground Zero on Sept. 11 and 12, 2001.A toxic examination by RJ Lee Group foud the collar contained 93 million chrysotile asbestos structured per square centimeter - 93,000 times higher than the normal 500-1,000 structures per square centimeter, which is the average amount of asbestos found in American cities.
Photo: Liz Sullivan

Remember the EPA lying about air quality in Lower Manhattan after 9/11?

This shirt puts the lie to that:

NY Post: ASBESTOS SHIRT IS A TOXIC NEW WRINKLE IN WTC WOE

April 9, 2006 -- Sky-high toxic levels of potentially deadly asbestos still cling to the fibers of this ordinary white dress shirt - worn by a 9/11 volunteer for two days at Ground Zero, a shocking analysis sought by The Post reveals.

Community liaison Yehuda Kaploun volunteered at Ground Zero for 48 hours immediately after the attack, wearing the shirt as he watched good friend and beloved Fire Department chaplain Mychal Judge die in a building collapse.

The volunteer kept his contaminated shirt packed in a sealed plastic bag until last week, when The Post sent the garment to RJ Lee Group laboratories for testing.

Analyzed portions of his shirt collar reveal a chilling concentration of chrysotile asbestos - 93,000 times higher than the average typically found in the environment in U.S. cities. That appears to be even higher than what the EPA said was found in the most contaminated, blown-out building after 9/11.

While there appear to be no specific regulations for asbestos levels on clothing, one lawyer for relief workers called the sickly shirt's amount "astronomically toxic."

It's the "high end of surface concentrations that you would find anywhere," added Chuck Kraisinger, a senior scientist for RJ Lee.

Testing also revealed the shirt was contaminated with zinc, mercury, antimony, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead and molybdenum. Tons of the heavy metals were pulverized and burned in the debris in fires that raged for four months.

The test results are especially frightening in light of last week's report by the Centers for Disease Control that 62 percent of those caught in the massive dust cloud suffered respiratory problems. Also, 46 percent of civilians living or working in the immediate area but not caught in the cloud still experienced respiratory problems - and 57 percent reported new and worsening respiratory symptoms.

Making matters worse, Dr. Mark Rosen, chief of the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Beth Israel Hospital, said that because it can take decades for asbestos cancers to develop, "We just won't know the effect [of Ground Zero exposure] for years."

About 400,000 tons of asbestos were released in the World Trade Center collapse. David Worby, a lawyer for 7,300 rescue and recovery workers who inhaled the smoke and dust at Ground Zero for months, called the area "the worst toxic site ever.

"It's mind-boggling the poisons they made these people work through," Worby said. "The amount of dioxins there make Vietnam look like a kindergarten."

"It is an urgent situation. If the government does not act . . . in terms of setting up [widespread] medical testing . . . more people over the next few years will die of toxic diseases than died on 9/11."

Have a nice day, Christy Todd Whitman.

Another Battle in the Bushco 'War on Science'

From today's Los Angeles Times:

How Environmentalists Lost the Battle Over TCE

After massive underground plumes of an industrial solvent were discovered in the nation's water supplies, the Environmental Protection Agency mounted a major effort in the 1990s to assess how dangerous the chemical was to human health.

Following four years of study, senior EPA scientists came to an alarming conclusion: The solvent, trichloroethylene, or TCE, was as much as 40 times more likely to cause cancer than the EPA had previously believed.

The preliminary report in 2001 laid the groundwork for tough new standards to limit public exposure to TCE. Instead of triggering any action, however, the assessment set off a high-stakes battle between the EPA and Defense Department, which had more than 1,000 military properties nationwide polluted with TCE.

By 2003, after a prolonged challenge orchestrated by the Pentagon, the EPA lost control of the issue and its TCE assessment was cast aside. As a result, any conclusion about whether millions of Americans were being contaminated by TCE was delayed indefinitely.

[]

The agency's authority and its scientific stature have been eroded under a withering attack on its technical staff by the military and its contractors. Indeed, the Bush administration leadership at the EPA ultimately sided with the military.

After years on the defensive, the Pentagon — with help from NASA and the Energy Department — is taking a far tougher stand in challenging calls for environmental cleanups. It is using its formidable political leverage to demand greater proof that industrial substances cause cancer before ratcheting up costly cleanups at polluted bases.

The military says it is only striving to make smart decisions based on sound science and accuses the EPA of being unduly influenced by left-leaning scientists.

But critics say the defense establishment has manufactured unwarranted scientific doubt, used its powerful role in the executive branch to cause delays and forced a reduction in the margins of protection that traditionally guard public health.

If the EPA's 2001 draft risk assessment was correct, then possibly thousands of the nation's birth defects and cancers every year are due in part to TCE exposure, according to several academic experts.

"It is a World Trade Center in slow motion," said Boston University epidemiologist David Ozonoff, a TCE expert. "You would never notice it."

Water Woes

From dailykos, a good post summarizing the world's water woes:

When the Well Runs Dry

Lower river flows and lower lake levels could impair navigation, hydroelectric power generation, and water quality, and reduce the supplies of water available for agricultural, residential, and industrial uses. Some areas may experience both increased flooding during winter and spring, as well as lower supplies during summer. In California's Central Valley, for example, melting snow provides much of the summer water supply; warmer temperatures would cause the snow to melt earlier and thus reduce summer supplies even if rainfall increased during the spring. More generally, the tendency for rainfall (see climate trends) to be more concentrated in large storms as temperatures rise would tend to increase river flooding, without increasing the amount of water available.

That quote is not from the dailykos diarist: it's from the EPA.

Jacques Cousteau

We forget that the water cycle and the life cycle are one.

Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans.

'Eau, No'

From the Independent (uk):

Eau, no: Clean, healthy and pure? Hardly. Bottled water is killing the planet
And our thirst grows, with 154 billion litres drunk in one year.

It costs 10,000 times more to create the bottled version than it does to produce tap water, say scientists. Huge resources are needed to draw it from the ground, add largely irrelevant minerals, and package and distribute it - sometimes half-way around the world.

The plastic bottles it comes in take 1,000 years to biodegrade, and in industrialised countries, bottled water is no more pure and healthy than what comes out of the tap.

The new study comes from the Earth Policy Institute (EPI), a Washington-based environmental group which has previously alerted the world to melting ice caps, expanding deserts and the environmental threats of a rapidly industrialising China. It points out that the world consumed a staggering 154 billion litres of bottled water in 2004 - an increase of 57 per cent in just half a decade.

I need to reform my water habits. I live in a town where the water didn't meet EPA standards for a number of contaminants. Every six months I got a notice in the mail telling me that our water contained these contaminants, and that no home filtration system would remove them. Therefore, under EPA standards, the water shouldn't be used for drinking. So I got into the habit of drinking bottled water.

The town's water filtration plant went online this summer, so it's time for me to get back to my filtered-from-the-tap water.

Today's Climate News

OR

Today's climate news is not good. From the Independent (UK):

Global warming: passing the 'tipping point'
Our special investigation reveals that critical rise in world temperatures is now unavoidable

Research commissioned by The Independent reveals that the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has now crossed a threshold, set down by scientists from around the world at a conference in Britain last year, beyond which really dangerous climate change is likely to be unstoppable.

The implication is that some of global warming's worst predicted effects, from destruction of ecosystems to increased hunger and water shortages for billions of people, cannot now be avoided, whatever we do. It gives considerable force to the contention by the green guru Professor James Lovelock, put forward last month in The Independent, that climate change is now past the point of no return.

The danger point we are now firmly on course for is a rise in global mean temperatures to 2 degrees above the level before the Industrial Revolution in the late 18th century.

At the moment, global mean temperatures have risen to about 0.6 degrees above the pre-industrial era - and worrying signs of climate change, such as the rapid melting of the Arctic ice in summer, are already increasingly evident. But a rise to 2 degrees would be far more serious.

By that point it is likely that the Greenland ice sheet will already have begun irreversible melting, threatening the world with a sea-level rise of several metres. Agricultural yields will have started to fall, not only in Africa but also in Europe, the US and Russia, putting up to 200 million more people at risk from hunger, and up to 2.8 billion additional people at risk of water shortages for both drinking and irrigation. The Government's conference on Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, held at the UK Met Office in Exeter a year ago, highlighted a clear threshold in the accumulation of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, which should not be surpassed if the 2 degree point was to be avoided with "relatively high certainty".

What do they mean by past the point of no return? Possibly, this:

Some scientists have been reluctant to talk about the overall global warming effect of all the greenhouses gases taken together, because there is another consideration - the fact that the "aerosol", or band of dust in the atmosphere from industrial pollution, actually reduces the warming.

As Professor Shine stresses, there is enormous uncertainty about the degree to which this is happening, so making calculation of the overall warming effect problematic. However, as James Lovelock points out - and Professor Shine and other scientists accept - in the event of an industrial downturn, the aerosol could fall out of the atmosphere in a matter of weeks, and then the effect of all the greenhouse gases taken together would suddenly be fully felt.

And how are the braindead oil peddlers in the Bush Administration reacting to this? By continuing their policy of ignoring global warming. La La La, I can't hear you, let's cut EPA's budget.

EPA Budget Cuts Trouble Environment Groups

Fishy

This is not good (from HuffPo):

Mad Hatters and Quicksilver Hares

In February 2003, the EPA reported that one American woman in twelve had elevated mercury levels in her body. In December of that year, the agency corrected its findings and reported that one in every six American women was at risk, and that by eating more than three servings of fish per week, even women who "might become pregnant" placed their children at a greater risk of lowered intelligence and developmental disabilities.

A lot of skepticism was expressed about these findings. So the Sierra Club joined in a nationwide clinical study by Drs. Steven Patch and Richard Maas, from the Environmental Quality Institute at the University of North Carolina-Asheville. They planned to test an unprecedented number of Americans for mercury body concentrations. The Sierra Club asked members of the New Hampshire legislature, delegates to our Summit and folks going to beauty salons and barber shops all over America, to get tested by giving us a hair sample. More than 6,600 people of all ages and from 50 states participated.

Today, Patch and Maas released their findings. The interim report found mercury levels exceeding the EPA’s recommended limit of one microgram of mercury per gram of hair in one in five women of childbearing age tested -- more than the EPA's previous estimates. While this sample might contain a larger number of women at risk than the population at large (because women who love fish might have been more concerned and thus more likely to get tested), it still confirms that the number of women with too much mercury in their bodies is enormous. Mercury contamination is of particular concern for women of childbearing years (16 to 49 years old) and their small children (under the age of six), because mercury exposure in the womb can cause neurological damage and other health problems.

"In the samples we analyzed, the greatest single factor influencing mercury exposure was the frequency of fish consumption," said Dr. Steve Patch. "We saw a direct relationship between people’s mercury levels and the amount of store-bought fish, canned tuna fish or locally caught fish people consumed."

Teflon Sticking Inside Us

Teflon was recently banned by the EPA, at least prospectively. It is supposedly going to be eliminated by the year 2015. I say supposedly because the EPA is notorious in not enforcing such bans. Asbestos was first "banned" by the EPA in 1972, but banned again and again over several decades, as follows:

WHEN WERE ASBESTOS PRODUCTS BANNED?
[] The manufacturing of asbestos-containing, spray-applied insulation and fireproofing was banned in 1972. Since 1972, the following bans were placed on asbestos by the EPA:

1973 - Spray-applied materials for fireproofing and insulation

1975 - Molded and wet applied asbestos such as pipe joint insulation

1976 - Asbestos for mechanical system insulation

1978 - Acoustical and decorative applications

1989 - Many other types of non-friable asbestos to be phased out in 3 stages by 1997

1991 - the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals required the EPA to reevaluate the bans. The EPA clarified the restrictions and the following additional items were banned:

1993 - Paper Products, Flooring Felts and New Uses of Asbestos

but reportedly was still being sold as late as 2000. And that's not even getting into vermiculite contaminated with tremolite asbestos, which was sold into this decade.)

EPA tries to curb use of Teflon chemical

In a surprise turn Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency moved to eliminate the production of a suspected carcinogen used in the making of Teflon and other non-stick and non-stain coatings.

The EPA has asked eight manufacturers that use a family of chemicals known as perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, to reduce production 95% by 2010 and to stop using it altogether by 2015.

PFOA, which is found in the blood of more than 95% of Americans, has been tied to cancer and developmental damage in animal studies. It is used in the process that makes water-, stain- and grease-resistant products, everything from microwave popcorn bags to pizza box liners, non-stick cookware to pillows, upholstery to carpets.

Like just about everyone else in this country, I have Teflon pans in my cupboard. I'm putting them away, and getting out my cast iron, after reading this in yesterday's WaPo:

Suspected Carcinogen Found in Cord Blood

BALTIMORE -- A suspected carcinogen used to make Teflon was found in nearly all the umbilical cord blood samples tested by researchers at Johns Hopkins Hospital. The researchers are now trying to determine whether it has harmed the newborns.

Of the 300 newborns tested, perfluorooctanoic acid, was found in the cord blood of 298.

What are the alternatives to Teflon?

What's the Deal With Teflon?

Calphalon One seems to be the most economical non-stick alternative. It's made of infused anodized aluminum, is a little stickier, but contains only aluminum, pressure-cast. Enameled cast iron and stainless steel with copper bottom are also good alternatives.

Too Bad This Isn't a Criminal Case. Christy Todd Whitman Should Be in Jail.

Judge Slams Ex-EPA Chief Over Sept. 11

NEW YORK -- A federal judge blasted former Environmental Protection Agency chief Christine Todd Whitman on Thursday for reassuring New Yorkers soon after the Sept. 11 attacks that it was safe to return to their homes and offices while toxic dust was polluting the neighborhood.

U.S. District Judge Deborah A. Batts refused to grant Whitman immunity against a class-action lawsuit brought in 2004 by residents, students and workers in lower Manhattan and Brooklyn who said they were exposed to hazardous materials from the destruction of the World Trade Center.

"No reasonable person would have thought that telling thousands of people that it was safe to return to lower Manhattan, while knowing that such return could pose long-term health risks and other dire consequences, was conduct sanctioned by our laws," the judge said.

She called Whitman's actions "conscience-shocking," saying the EPA chief knew that the collapse of the twin towers released tons of hazardous materials into the air.

Republicans to FDNY: Drop Dead

'Promise Broken': N.Y. to Lose 9/11 Aid

WASHINGTON - Congressional budget negotiators have decided to take back $125 million in Sept. 11 aid from New York, which had fought to keep the money to treat sick and injured ground zero workers, lawmakers said Tuesday.

New York officials had sought for months to hold onto the funding, originally meant to cover increased worker compensation costs stemming from the 2001 terror attacks.

But a massive labor and health spending bill moving fitfully through House-Senate negotiations would take back that funding, lawmakers said.

[]

The tug-of-war over the $125 million began earlier this year when the White House proposed taking the money back because the state had not yet spent it.

New York protested, saying the money was part of the $20 billion pledged by
President Bush to help rebuild after the Sept. 11 attacks. Health advocates said the money is needed to treat current and future illnesses among ground zero workers.

The Senate voted last month to let New York keep the $125 million, but the House made no such move. House and Senate budget negotiators then decided to take the money back, lawmakers and aides said.

Top New York fire officials recently lobbied Congress to keep the funding. Fire and police officials say they worry that many people will develop long-term lung and mental health problems from their time working on the burning pile of toxic debris at ground zero and they want to use the money to help them.

This is especially galling because the EPA lied to New Yorkers and worst of all to the workers who worked to clean up the World Trade Center site about the toxic quality of the air at Ground Zero. Think of this every time you hear President Dumbass say 9/11 changed everything, over and over. He lies. Constantly, reflexively, as though he were breathing. If only we had saved canisters of Ground Zero air for him.

Environmental Protection Agency Also Run By "Inept Political Hacks"

From skippy:

while our corporate media sleeps...

cover-up: toxic waters 'will make new orleans unsafe for a decade'

toxic chemicals in the new orleans flood waters will make the city unsafe for full human habitation for a decade, a us government official has told the independent on sunday. and, he added, the bush administration is covering up the danger.

...mr kaufman claimed the bush administration was playing down the need for a clean-up: the epa has not been included in the core white house group tackling the crisis. "its budget has been cut and inept political hacks have been put in key positions," mr kaufman said. - the independent

We must remember that Bush's EPA lied to the workers at Ground Zero about environmental hazards from the collapse of the World Trade Center, and that today thousands are sick as a result:

Updated 9/11 Report Examines Failure to Protect Citizens

"Thousands of workers and residents who have been exposed to 9/11-related contamination are now sick," said Joel Shufro, Executive Director, New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health. "Many of them might never have been exposed if federal officials had not downplayed the hazard in Lower Manhattan and the importance of wearing appropriate protective equipment at all times. Rescue and recovery workers in the Gulf Coast must not be subjected to the same lack of attention to their potential exposures. Until the post-Katrina air (and the water rescuers are wading in) is proven safe, it should be regarded as hazardous, so rescuers and others exposed should receive necessary training and wear appropriate respiratory protection and skin protection, if it is available. If either the training or the gear is not available, emergency officials should make a very high priority of obtaining it, while providing medical surveillance for workers engaged in the rescue and recovery."

The Receding Water Will Spread This Toxic Filth Around the Gulf and Eventually the World

from skippy the bush kangaroo (yes, he posts in all lower case letters, like e.e. cummings). To click on the links contained within the article, click on the article title. Skippy is raising money from blogtopia (yes! skippy coined that phrase!) and so far has raised over $10,000.

yes...it does get worse

...it seems that a toxic landfill site on which housing was built in central new orleans is now under floodwaters with the potential to pollute and contaminate portions of the gulf coast. despite the overwhelming international coverage of hurricane katrina's lethal attack on southern u.s. states, it is the current issue of solid waste & recycling magazine that unearthed an environmental hazard that has the potential of being an underwater love canal.

cnn and fox news have now been alerted.

something called the agriculture street landfill (asl) is located on a 95-acre site in central new orleans.

it is registered as a "superfund site" (whatever that is) on the federal government's national priorities list of highly contaminated sites requiring cleanup and containment. but nothing has been done.

...according to the editor of hazardous waste magazine, the asl site -- now under water -- will almost inevitably leach toxic effluent into the floodwaters, with the potential of inflicting unpredictable damage on the coast, and those that live there -- a possible environmental catastrophe. - toronto star

houses and buildings that were constructed in later years directly atop parts of the landfill. residents report unusual cancers and health problems and have lobbied for years to be relocated away from the old contaminated site, which contains not only municipal garbage, but buried industrial wastes such as what would be produced by service stations and dry cleaners, manufacturers or burning. the site was routinely sprayed with ddt in the 1940s and 50s and, in 1962, 300,000 cubic yards of excess fill were removed from asl because of ongoing subsurface fires. (the site was nicknamed "dante's inferno" because of the fires.)

the asl can be thought of a sort of love canal for new orleans -– and now it sits under water. - solid waste & recyling

a political problem was lurking behind the scientific numbers. nobody in the city or federal government wanted to take responsibility for the problem. the epa was overseeing the pollution problem, but the neighborhood was built on land the city had owned and polluted. It had been financed under a department of housing and urban development program. - nola.com