EPA Chief tells GOP to STFU

[one...two...tree 2,762]

That high-pitched whistling is the sound of EPA chief Lisa P. Jackson's hand knifing through the air on the way to delivering a righteous slap upside the head of the GOP. Here are the money quotes from her editorial in yesterday's L.A. Times, in which she patiently explains that the Grand Ol' Party wants to kill jobs by blocking critical air pollution regulations.

Using the economy as cover, and repeating unfounded claims that "regulations kill jobs," they have pushed through an unprecedented rollback of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and our nation's waste-disposal laws, all of which have successfully protected our families for decades.

If the house succeeds, says Jackson, it will mean the sickening or deaths of hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens.

This is not hyperbole. The link between health issues and pollution is irrefutable. Mercury is a neurotoxin that affects brain development in unborn children and young people. Lead has similar effects in our bodies. Soot, composed of particles smaller across than a human hair, is formed when fuels are burned and is a direct cause of premature death. Nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds contribute to the ozone alert days when seniors, asthmatics and others with respiratory problems are at serious risk if they do nothing more dangerous than step outside and breathe the air.

The irony here is that the amendments to the Clean Air Act the GOP is trying to roll back were originally passed in 1990 with a bipartisan consensus. What a difference 20 years makes. Nü-GOP intransigence will cost us billions:

By contrast, the nation's first-ever standards for mercury and other air toxic pollutants which the EPA will finalize this fall — and which the Republican leadership aims to block — are estimated to create 31,000 short-term construction jobs and 9,000 long-term jobs in the utility sector through modernizing power plants. And the savings in health benefits are estimated to be up to $140 billion per year by 2016.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Mercury in broken CFL bulbs can exceed safe exposure levels for humans!

July 6, 2011. Finally someone measured the mercury content of compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs!

We have been told that these bulbs contain 0.5 mg of mercury and that lower mercury-content bulbs will be produced in the future, yet many bulbs exceed this value as shown in the article below.

Li,Y. and L. Jin. 2011. Environmental Release of Mercury from Broken Compact Fluorescent Lamps, ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE. 28 (10), 5 pp. Click here for pdf with links and here for abstract.

The total amount of mercury in CFLs ranged from 0.1 to 3.6 mg.

What does this mean?

Let’s look at the water quality guidelines for mercury as a comparison.

The maxiumum concentration of total mercury in drinking water is 1.0 micro gram per litre. That number is 0.001 mg mercury per litre of water. Therefore the mercury content of a CFL bulb, at the nominal 0.5 mg per bulb, is 500 time higher than the concentration in a litre of drinking water!

Is there anyone out there who is a watch dog for this product or can CFL manufacturers do anything they want? We don’t allow lead paint on toys from China yet we import light bulbs that contain mercury! This is not a bright idea for us, for the environment, or for the Chinese workers. Click here to read ‘Green’ lightbulbs poison workers, Hundreds of factory staff are being made ill by mercury used in bulbs destined for the West.

According to Li and Jin (2011), CFL bulbs continue to release mercury vapor for more than 10 weeks once broken. ”Total amount of Hg [mercury] vapor relased from a broken CFL can exceed 1.0 mg, which can cause Hg [mercury] levels in a regular room to exceed the safe human exposure limit under poor ventilation conditons.”

Mercury, as long as it is contained within the light bulb is not a problem. But if the CFL bulb breaks, either in the home or at the dump, the mercury is released into the atmosphere contributing to the global load of mercury. In the home the neurotoxic mercury can be inhailed by the occupants if a bulb breaks. Rapid clean-up according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is highly recommended as is proper disposal at a toxic waste site that is equiped to handle these light bulbs. Click here for EPA recommendations.

The fact that Canada is considering extending the deadline for banning energy inefficinet light bulbs for two more years is a breath of fresh air.

Reducing greenhouse gases is a noble venture but not with products that are poisons to both humans and other life-forms. Surely our engineers and designers can do better than this!

http://www.magdahavas.com/2011/07/06/mercury-in-broken-cfl-bulbs-can-exceed-safe-exposure-levels-for-humans/

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The irony here is that the amendments to the Clean Air Act the GOP is trying to roll back were originally passed in 1990 with a bipartisan consensus. What a difference 20 years makes. Nü-GOP intransigence will cost us billions:

What a difference an economy destroying President makes. The Repubs are doing exactly what the people sent them there to do. The EPA chief needs to get her resume updated.

Ironic that supposedly implementing these changes can affect jobs, but not implementing them cannot. It never ceases to amaze me. Government has failed to produce jobs or savings so we need more government!

Edited October 23, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[kytwell 179]

Ferrum College building biomass boiler

Oct. 21 -- Byproducts from the lumber industry will fuel a new biomass boiler and provide green energy to Ferrum College in Ferrum, Va.

The unit will provide about 65% of the heat and hot water on campus and could potentially burn agricultural products, such as locally grown switchgrass, in the future.

"We are proud to be building a facility that serves as an example of Ferrum´s commitment to sustainable initiatives," said College President Jennifer Braaten in a statement.

Work on the project began in August and will continue until March, the college said. When operational, the boiler is estimated to save the school about 25% on heating costs.

http://www.wasterecyclingnews.com/headlines2.html?id=1319210771&allowcomm=true&headline=Ferrum+College+building+biomass+boiler

[Danno 1,228]

I can't think of a federal agency more in vulnerable to severe cuts than the EPA.

Clearly the problem is, their work (to a large extent) has been accomplished and now they simply look for the next boogie-man to justify their continuos growth and consumption of power over the everyday lives of people and the economy.

Why the EPA is even causing the "tax on rain" home owners pay for the water that falls on their property via pressure from the EPA.

Cities slap fees on storm runoff

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

New environmental regulations are prompting cities to impose fees on property owners for the cost of managing storm water runoff, the leading cause of water pollution in most of the nation.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has started issuing a series of limits on storm water pollution that will require local governments to spend large amounts of money on water quality and soon start slowly reshaping America's roads, housing developments and even the traditional lawn.

The EPA for the first time is placing specific limits on how much storm water pollution can flow into the nation's streams, rivers, lakes and bays. Federal courts have ruled that the Clean Water Act requires more stringent regulations.

Storm water — from roofs, roads, parking lots, farms — carries oil, manure, sediments and sometimes raw sewage. It has created problems from increased flooding to muddy rivers and a New Jersey-sized aquatic "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico.

Most local governments pay for storm water systems from general tax revenue. Faced with budget gaps, cities and counties are moving to storm water fees — like water and utility bills — based on how much rainwater flows off a property.

The fees have generated stiff opposition in some places. Seminole County commissioners in Florida rejected a fee after 500 people attended a hearing to protest. "It's a tax on rain," says anti-tax activist Douglas Bruce, who led a successful effort to have Colorado Springs voters repeal a storm water fee.

Fees typically range from $2 to $10 a month for an average home. The amount depends on how much space is consumed by roofs, driveways and other surfaces. Large retail stores, schools and airports can pay thousands of dollars a month:

• Hays, Kan., homeowners will start paying $4 a month in April to raise $378,000 a year for storm water improvements. Haverhill, Mass., and Urbandale, Iowa, are adding fees, too.

• Maryland is considering requiring cities and counties to charge storm water fees.

• The Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District has been sued by business groups for trying to impose a $4.75 monthly fee in the Cleveland area.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2010-03-28-runoff-fees_N.htm