Recent Comment
Share
In most respects, this adminstration's EPA is getting things done. They're regularly throwing out bad policies and implementing better ones. Here are four things the agency has announced recently that made us cheer and one that made us boo - loudly.
The Good
1. They're overhauling the Toxic Substances Control Act.
The TSCA was introduced in 1976 and hasn't been updated since. At the time, 60,000 chemicals were on the EPA inventory, since then, 24,000 have been added, but only 200 have been tested and only five banned. Even scarier is that about 20 percent of those chemicals are kept secret through a loop hole in the act that doesn't require companies to report chemicals used in manufacturing if they're considered "proprietary." The EPA is creating a list of chemicals of concern, including phtalates, short-chain chlorinated paraffins, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and perfluorinated chemicals, all of which have raised health and environmental concerns. The list will put pressure on chemical companies to either prove they're safe or cease production. It's likely that the new legislation will address the loop hole allowing chemicals ingredients to be kept from the public.
2. They're cracking down on smog pollution.
The agency is tightening the standards for ozone in the air from 75 parts per billion to 60-70 parts per billion. If the new rule is passed, states and cities will have implement tougher regulations of air pollution sources like cars and power plants. The change will cost $19 - $90 billion to implement, but will save an equal amount in health care costs for people with asthma and other lung conditions.
3. They're helping us find the cleanest vehicles.
The EPA has released a Green Vehicle Guide that rates cars and trucks based on tailpipe emissions, CO2 emissions and fuel economy. As Green Car Reports says, this guide has the clearest ranking of which cars are clean without using questionable criteria. Hybrids get the best scores of course, but it also gives high marks to other fuel efficient options.
4. They're calling out environmental offenders.
The agency has put together a map of all facilities that have been caught breaking environmental laws. The map marks each facility and reveals what crime they committed (air, water, land pollution, etc.), what action was taken against them, what fines or legal settlements they owe. This map serves two great purposes: (1) it publicly shames offenders for their actions and (2) it allows the public to know what kind of pollution is happening in their area and what's being done about it. The map contains 4,600 facilities and is searchable by offense and type of facility.
The Bad
They're still approving mountaintop removal coal mining.
This week, the EPA cleared the path for a new MTR coal mine project in West Virginia called the Hobet 45 mine and extended the deadline for consideration of another project called the Spruce No. 1 mine. Last April, it looked like the agency would start taking a stand against MTR mining, so this announcement is more than disappointing.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Jess @ Openly Balanced, January 08, 2010
In light of the alternatives and the costs of mountaintop removal mining, it is absurd that the EPA is continuing to approve these projects.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Sedate Me, January 08, 2010
-
- +1
-
-
written by Knoxville Reader, January 08, 2010
-
- +1
-
-
written by Mitchell Sink, January 08, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...99331.html
Excerpt:
EPA, USDA Encourage Farmers To Put Coal Ash That Contains Mercury And Arsenic On Crops
INDIANAPOLIS — The federal government is encouraging farmers to spread a chalky waste from coal-fired power plants on their fields to loosen and fertilize soil even as it considers regulating coal wastes for the first time.
The material is produced by power plant "scrubbers" that remove acid rain causing sulfur dioxide from plant emissions. A synthetic form of the mineral gypsum, it also contains mercury, arsenic, lead and other heavy metals.
-
- +2
-
-
written by Simon, January 09, 2010
-
- -4
-
-
written by Rich, January 12, 2010
Do a google search on "effects of mountain top removal mining" and then decide for yourself.
Rich
-
- +0
-
-
written by Michael, January 15, 2010
-
- +0
-
-
written by Michael, January 15, 2010
-
- +0
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
My question: Is there nothing else these mountain tops can be used for? Can they not be used for wind power going through the valleys? Can they not be used for solar power before or after the mining?
It seems like such environmental devistation using this practice that there has to be some financial benefit from trying alternatives. Has WV nothing else to offer then coal?