Tag: pollution

European nations dumped 200,000 barrels of radioactive waste in the ocean, and humans might soon pay the price

A team of scientists has found 3,355 barrels of radioactive waste at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. The discovery was made at a depth of 13,000 feet, and hundreds of miles offshore from France. This is only a tiny part of the actual number of barrels filled with nuclear waste scattered at the bottom of the sea. Between 1946 and 1990, over 200,000 such barrels were dumped by European nations, assuming it was the best way to keep people on land safe. This was done under the supervision of the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), a body comprising 34 countries that is tasked with ensuring nuclear safety and waste management. But now there are fears that this waste can reach humans via the food chain. Scientists have warned that this radioactive material could be absorbed by marine life, which can enter sea creatures and then humans who eat the contaminated seafood. This could cause long-term health issues, damage tissues, and increase the risk of cancer.

The barrels are not capable of holding the contents inside them forever. They were designed to release the radioactive material slowly, but surely. They had a life span of 20 to 26 years, and that time is already gone. So what next? The French scientists are on a mission to understand what would happen to these barrels. In the first leg, they used sonar and the autonomous underwater robot UlyX to map the Abyssal Plains. They said that most of the radioactive material in these barrels is weak and does not pose any immediate risk to humans since it is deep inside the ocean. However, this does not mitigate the long-term effects, which include contaminating marine life and entering the food chain. About one-third of the material in these barrels was tritium, which is considered insignificant. The rest are beta and gamma emitters, which lose radioactivity, with about two per cent being alpha radiation.

Keep reading

Trump EPA To Remove “Greenhouse Gases” From List Of Dangerous Pollutants

The Trump administration is acting to overturn a key 2009 Environmental Protection Agency finding used to justify most federal government regulations regarding climate change.

The EPA has crafted a proposal that would undo the government’s “endangerment finding”, a determination that pollutants from burning fossil fuels, such as carbon dioxide and methane, can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. The finding has long served as the foundation for a host of policies and rules to address climate change. The EPA’s proposal to revoke the finding is currently under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

In 2007, the Supreme Court found in Massachusetts v. EPA that the agency is required to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Then, in 2009 during the Obama administration, the EPA declared greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were a hazard to people. 

“This long-overdue finding cements 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States Government began seriously addressing the challenge of greenhouse gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform,” then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in announcing the decision.

Keep reading

How China Is Censoring Scientific Research Across The Globe

We all know how serious environmental degradation is in China. Its emissions have skyrocketed, air and water quality have plummeted, and critical habitat and ecosystems have disappeared. That’s why unadulterated research on the topic is critical to better informed policy. But my recent experience shows that China’s censorship model is spreading to the West, hindering that research from taking place.

In 2012 I published an academic paper in the journal Environmental Politics coining the term “authoritarian environmentalism” to describe the way that environmental policy is made in China. This year, I was approached by Lu Liao, a professor of urban planning at Renmin University in Beijing, to submit a paper to a special issue on China in Environmental Policy and Governance, a respected journal published by the major academic publisher Wiley, based in New Jersey.

I suggested reviewing what we have learned about “authoritarian environmentalism” since 2012. “The idea of revisiting the 2012 paper sounds very timely and meaningful,” replied Liao, who sits on the editorial board of Environmental Policy and Governance.

That’s when things went awry. The proposal I sent her included a new research question about whether the policy model in China is flawed by design, a form of greenwashing intended to legitimate one-party rule rather than improve the environment.

After a few days, Liao wrote back to report some “intriguing context from my own position,” as she called it. “Due to current sensitivities around ideology and international relations in China, many Chinese universities are quite cautious about discussions involving certain terms, and faculty are prohibited from publish[ing] work on some sensitive topics.”

I was “invited” to withdraw my submission and seek publication elsewhere. China’s censorship regime was being extended to a Western scholar and to a Western academic journal.

I reached out to the journal’s editor, Andy Gouldson, professor of environmental policy at Leeds University, who has done work in China, seeking clarification. He confirmed that “there are sensitivities for the guest editors of the special issue” and invited me to submit the paper as a regular contribution. I’ll decline. I won’t publish in a journal that bends to China’s censorship regime.

Put aside the irony that my research on authoritarianism in China was sidelined by authoritarianism in China. The bigger scandal here is how Western academics and publishers are willing to allow PRC censorship to dictate the terms of their trade.

Keep reading

Mexican Border State Demands Investigation of SpaceX Due to Beach Pollution

Officials in the Mexican border state of Tamaulipas have announced that they will be requesting a federal investigation into SpaceX for polluting Mexican beaches after pieces of the company’s rockets have washed ashore in recent days.

Karina Lizeth Saldivar, the head of the Tamaulipas Secretariat for Urban Development and Environment, recently announced that they would be requesting that federal authorities in Mexico investigate the damages and potential damages that rocket fragments could cause.

According to Saldivar, the rocket pieces could pose a potential danger to locals and claimed that her agency would request a formal investigation by Mexican federal environmental agencies. It remains unclear if Mexico’s government could do anything about the issue.

Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court shot down a lawsuit against U.S. gun manufacturers filed by Mexico’s government, Breitbart Texas reported. Just one day after the ruling, Mexico’s President, Claudia Sheinbaum, claimed that her government would be pursuing other lawsuits in an attempt to place the blame for the country’s raging cartel violence on the United States instead of the country’s widespread corruption.

Keep reading

Wasting Away In Wind-And-Solarville

While green advocates commonly use the terms renewable, sustainable, and net zero to describe their efforts, the dirty little secret is that much of the waste from solar panels and wind turbines is ending up in landfills.

The current amounts of fiberglass, resins, aluminum and other chemicals—not to mention propeller blades from giant wind turbines—pose no threat current to local town dumps, but this largely ignored problem will become more of a challenge in the years ahead as the 500 million solar panels and the 73,000 wind turbines now operating in the U.S. are decommissioned and replaced.

Greens insist that reductions in carbon emissions will more than compensate for increased levels of potentially toxic garbage; others fret that renewable energy advocates have not been forthright about their lack of eco-friendly plans and the technology to handle the waste.

“Nobody planned on this, nobody had a plan to get rid of them, nobody planned for closure,” said Dwight Clark, whose company, Solar E Waste Solutions, recycles solar panels. “Nobody thought this through.”

The discussion about what to do with worn-out solar and wind equipment is another topic usually elided in Net Zero blueprints, which often focus on the claimed benefits of projects while discounting or ignoring the costs. As RealClearInvestigations previously reported regarding the lack of plans for acquiring the massive amounts of land for solar and wind farms needed to achieve net zero, the math can get fuzzy, and the numbers cited most frequently are those rosiest for renewables.

“They’ve been either silent, or incoherent—or just hand-wave that we should recycle all this stuff without telling us how,” said Mark Mills, executive director of the National Center on Energy Analytics. In the headlong effort to make solar and wind seem as inexpensive as possible, they have not included fees that address the eventual cost of disposal, which could leave taxpayers holding the bag.

Keep reading

NAACP Accuses Musk Of Endangering Black Communities With Supercomputer Fumes

The NAACP is demanding Memphis officials shut down Elon Musk’s xAI supercomputer facility, claiming the world’s largest AI training center violates clean air laws and threatens the health of nearby black residents.

The civil rights organization sent a letter Thursday to the Shelby County Health Department and Memphis Light, Gas and Water officials, alleging xAI has operated up to 35 gas turbines without proper permits for over a year at its Colossus facility in South Memphis. The turbines power the supercomputer that trains Musk’s Grok AI chatbot, which they claim emits excessive hazardous pollutants.

“We are urging you again to ensure that xAI stops operating its unpermitted turbines in violations of clean air and open meeting act laws and to order xAI to pay penalties for operating in violation of the law,” the letter states. “The message that [Shelby County Health Department] and [Memphis Light, Gas and Water] have sent to the community is that billionaires matter more than the tax payers and residents who live there.”

Musk has said the data center — called “Colossus” — will be the first gigawatt-scale AI training facility in the world. It powers Grok, the chatbot xAI is positioning to compete with OpenAI’s ChatGPT and others.

But the NAACP says the operation is  “illegal,” citing emissions estimates of up to 2,000 tons of nitrogen oxide per year from the turbines and invoking the Clean Air Act’s “New Source Review” rule. They argue xAI’s decision to split the turbines into smaller groups is a deliberate strategy to “sidestep the law.”

Keep reading

‘Green Energy’ Is Quietly Polluting A Landfill Near You

While green advocates commonly use the terms renewable, sustainable, and net zero to describe their efforts, the dirty little secret is that much of the waste from solar panels and wind turbines is ending up in landfills. 

The current amounts of fiberglass, resins, aluminum and other chemicals — not to mention propeller blades from giant wind turbines — pose no threat currently to local town dumps, but this largely ignored problem will become more of a challenge in the years ahead as the 500 million solar panels and the 73,000 wind turbines now operating in the U.S. are decommissioned and replaced.

Greens insist that reductions in carbon emissions will more than compensate for increased levels of potentially toxic garbage; others fret that renewable energy advocates have not been forthright about their lack of eco-friendly plans and the technology to handle the waste.

“Nobody planned on this, nobody had a plan to get rid of them, nobody planned for closure,” said Dwight Clark, whose company, Solar eWaste Solutions, recycles solar panels. “Nobody thought this through.”

The discussion about what to do with worn-out solar and wind equipment is another topic usually elided in net zero blueprints, which often focus on the claimed benefits of projects while discounting or ignoring the costs. As RealClearInvestigations previously reported regarding the lack of plans for acquiring the massive amounts of land for solar and wind farms needed to achieve net zero, the math can get fuzzy, and the numbers cited most frequently are those rosiest for renewables.

“They’ve been either silent, or incoherent — or just hand-wave that we should recycle all this stuff without telling us how,” said Mark Mills, executive director of the National Center for Energy Analytics. In the headlong effort to make solar and wind seem as inexpensive as possible, they have not included fees that address the eventual cost of disposal, which could leave taxpayers holding the bag.

Some renewable supporters acknowledge Mills’ point. The Alliance for Affordable Energy, which supports government-funded research on recycling panels and turbines, said the “circular economy” Mills referred to has yet to materialize.

“With the existing energy infrastructure, a lot of end-of-life questions have never been addressed,” the Alliance’s executive director, Logan Burke, told RCI. “It may be that those costs have to be embedded in the front-end, but somehow we need to make the market circular. How do we find that market at the end of their useful life?”

Just how many panels the U.S. will dispose of or retire each year is also unclear. No clearing house keeps track of national figures, according to Meng Tao, an energy engineering professor at Arizona State University and a consultant on renewable waste issues.

Keep reading

EPA declares Flint water emergency over after more than $100 million in taxpayer-funded grants

Anearly decade-long fight for safe drinking water in Flint is over.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced Monday the city met all of the requirements of a Safe Drinking Water Act emergency order, which has been lifted.

The EPA issued the order in January 2016.

“Today we celebrate a decade’s worth of hard work and partnership at the local, state and federal level to ensure the residents of Flint, Michigan have access to clean, safe drinking water,” Zeldin said in a statement Monday. “Lifting this emergency order is a cause for great celebration for residents of Flint who worked so hard and sacrificed so much to get to this point.”

Zeldin said water sampling shows the city’s water system is in compliance with lead standards.

Since the order was implemented, the city has replaced more than 97% of its old lead pipes, and the water system has tested below the acceptable limit since July 2016.

The EPA has given more than $100 million in taxpayer-funded grants to the city and the state since 2016 to address the issues.

“The lifting of the EPA’s emergency order is a powerful testament to the strength, and advocacy of Flint residents,” Flint Mayor Sheldon A. Neeley said. For nearly a decade, we have worked tirelessly to restore trust and integrity to our water system, as well as meeting rigorous standards. While this milestone marks progress, our commitment to clean, safe drinking water remains unwavering. We will continue to advance infrastructure, strengthen safeguards, and ensure that the mistakes of the past are never repeated. Flint families deserve nothing less.”

The city’s water crisis began in 2014 when it switched from Detroit’s system to the Flint River to save money. Without proper treatment, that water corroded lead pipes that led to lead contamination and a declared public health emergency.

Keep reading

‘Public Health Betrayal’: EPA Tosses Drinking Water Limits on 4 Toxic PFAS Chemicals

U.S. regulators said Wednesday they will do away with limits on certain types of toxic chemicals in U.S. drinking water, a move that critics warn could expose millions of Americans to dangerous contaminants.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it intends to rescind limits set under President Joe Biden in April 2024 on four types of harmful per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) chemicals widely found in drinking water — perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS) and GenX.

The EPA will keep the limits of 4 parts per trillion in drinking water for two other types of PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), the agency said in a statement.

But, in another move drawing criticism from health advocates, the agency said it will delay the deadline for drinking water systems to comply from 2029 to 2031.

“This is a public health betrayal, plain and simple,” said Melanie Benesh, vice president for government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group.

“Science is clear: PFAS are dangerous even in tiny amounts. The agency must protect all Americans, not just from two chemicals, but from the entire class of harmful PFAS.”

The four PFAS chemicals the EPA plans to roll back regulations for “are the ones currently in use because industry developed them to replace PFOA and PFOS, so they are the chemicals most likely to increase contamination in the future,” Betsy Southerland, a former EPA senior scientist and a former director in the agency’s Office of Water, said in a statement.

PFAS are types of chemicals that have long been used in a wide variety of products and industrial processes, but many have been linked to health problems that include certain cancers and immune system and reproductive harms.

Countries around the world have been pushing companies to eliminate the use of PFAS, known to be particularly dangerous, such as PFOS and PFOA, but the chemicals remain difficult to eradicate.

A recent study found residents of a Michigan community polluted with PFAS from a paper mill continue to have high levels of the chemicals in their blood, even though the mill closed down 25 years ago.

Keep reading

Attor­ney Gen­er­al Ken Pax­ton Pro­tects Texas Envi­ron­ment and Secures $60 Mil­lion Judg­ment Against Recy­cling Com­pa­ny Dump­ing Chem­i­cals into River

Attorney General Ken Paxton has secured a judgment of more than $60 million against David Polston and his companies, Inland Environmental and Remediation, Inland Recycling, and Boundary Ventures, for illegally dumping pollutants in Texas waterways and lands. 

In 2019, a tributary of the Colorado River called Skull Creek turned black with chemical pollution, killing fish and wildlife. Additionally, unpermitted pits of petroleum and chemical-laden earth and leaking chemical containers were discovered nearby, in violation of Texas law. The source was a sham recycling facility owned by Polston. Attorney General Paxton immediately sued to stop the pollution and spearheaded years of litigation that achieved an agreed final judgment penalizing Polston and his companies for their extensive environmental misconduct. When Attorney General Paxton learned the owner of the polluted site had been paid for waste disposal on his property, he successfully pursued a court order requiring the landowner to restore the polluted property.

Keep reading