Dedicated to bringing awareness to the public of environmental issues, concerns, and questions.
*Disclaimer: Reblogged posts and those opinions in said posted articles are not always representative of the blog author's view point
It’s a fracking shame. Straight from the Hill to you:
Under the bill, the EPA would be prohibited from issuing new water-quality standards for a given pollutant if the EPA has already approved a state water-quality standard for the pollutant, unless the state agrees with the EPA.
It also says the EPA cannot supersede a state’s determination that a discharge into the environment will comply with applicable environmental standards. If the EPA has approved a state program under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, the EPA cannot withdraw this approval simply because it and the state disagree.
Also under the bill, the EPA could not block states from listing an area as a disposal site if the state sees it as an appropriate site.
With House passage, the bill is expected to go no where in the Senate. And even if it could be approved in that body, the Obama administration has threatened to veto the bill.
“H.R. 2018 would roll back the key provisions of the CWA [Clean Water Act] that have been the underpinning of 40 years of progress in making the Nation’s waters fishable, swimmable, and drinkable,” a July 12 Statement of Administration Policy said. “H.R. 2018 could limit efforts to safeguard communities by removing the Federal Government’s authority to take action when State water quality standards are not protective of public health.”
Yep.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) today announced an agreement to jointly enforce U.S. and international air pollution requirements for vessels operating in U.S. waters. The requirements establish limits on nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions and require the use of fuel with lower sulfur content, protecting people’s health and the environment by reducing ozone-producing pollution, which can cause smog and aggravate asthma. The most stringent requirements apply to ships operating within 200 nautical miles of the coast of North America.
“Today’s agreement forges a strong partnership between EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard, advancing our shared commitment to enforce air emissions standards for ships operating in U.S. waters,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Reducing harmful air pollution is a priority for EPA and by working with the Coast Guard we will ensure that the ships moving through our waters meet their environmental obligations, protecting our nation’s air quality and the health of our coastal communities.”
“This agreement demonstrates the Coast Guard’s long-standing commitment to protecting our nation’s marine environment,” said Rear Adm. Kevin Cook, director of Prevention Policy for the U.S. Coast Guard. “Aligning our capabilities with EPA enhances our commitment to the marine environment while minimizing the impact on shipping.”
The large marine diesel engines that provide propulsion and auxiliary power on many ocean-going vessels emit significant amounts of pollution. Without further action, EPA estimates that by 2030, NOx emissions from ships will more than double, growing to 2.1 million tons per year. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by EPA and the USCG outlines the agencies’ commitment to jointly enforce federal and international laws that EPA projects could prevent 12,000-31,000 premature deaths annually by 2030. Under the MOU, both the USCG and EPA will perform inspections and investigations, and will take appropriate enforcement actions if a violation is detected.
Well they are at it again, although I am in favor of State’s rights this just does not sit well with me. This bill http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr2018ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr2018ih.pdf would amend the Clean Water Act (CWA) to close the gap between the states and federal government by allowing the states to hold the responsibility of controlling pollution via permitting. You might be thinking this screams tea party yet it a bi-partisan bill.
sponsored by Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), and 32 others. Mica is hot and bothered about the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to address nutrient pollution in Florida’s waterways. Rahall is mad that the EPA rejected an application to dump strip mining waste from a mountaintop removal site in West Virginia. At least we can get representatives from both sides of the aisle to agree on undermining the nation’s foundational environmental laws!
What do you think? Should the federal goverment be the ultimate survey of state’s permitting or should the states hold the primary responsibility?
*(Keep in mind I am from Texas where they are trying to manuever the TCEQ permitting procedures in ways that are basically illegal, by EPA standards.)
This Google Data Center Is Cooled Only By Sea Water
Computers get hot. Google data centers? They’ve got lots of them. Their new center in Hamina, Finland, was built in an old paper mill with a network of granite tunnels underneath them. Tunnels filled with cold sea water Google could pump into their center to rob the computers of heat before Google sent the water back from where it came from, mixed with more cold water so it wouldn’t affect wildlife. This is an inspiring design decision. [BI via Scuttlefish]
World Environment Day is June 5, and Budweiser is asking the men of America to grow a beard to help conserve water. That’s right. Budweiser wants men to forego shaving between now and June 5 to help save 1 million gallons of water.
This year the program has been expanded to include suppliers,…
After rainstorms, many homeowners have mudholes under downspouts and sidewalks full of runoff. The day after watching gallons of water go to waste, it’s back to watering with filtered drinking water. Learn how to harvest rainwater.
“Save water, save money. Using this device, the average household could save over $100 a year.” bookofjoe: 5-Minute Shower
Well we already have floating garbage in the ocean…why not make that PV solar?
For Americans, flushing the toilet is the main way we use water. We use more water flushing toilets than bathing or cooking or washing our hands, our dishes, or our clothes. When we think about the big ways we use water, flushing the toilet doesn’t typically leap to mind. It’s one of those unnoticed parts of our daily water use — our daily water-mark — that turns out to be both startling and significant.
The largest single consumer of water in the United States, in fact, is virtually invisible. Every day, the nation’s power plants use 201 billion gallons of water in the course of generating electricity. That isn’t water used by hydroelectric plants — it’s the water used by coal, gas, and nuclear power plants for cooling and to make steam.
Toilets and electric outlets may be stealthy consumers of water, but they at least serve vital functions. One of the largest daily consumers of water isn’t a use at all. One of every six gallons of water pumped into water mains by U.S. utilities simply leaks away, back into the ground.
Sixteen percent of the water disappears from the pipes before it makes it to a home or business or factory. Every six days, U.S. water utilities lose an entire day’s water. And that 16 percent U.S. loss rate isn’t too bad — British utilities lose 19 percent of the water they pump; the French lose 26 percent. There is perhaps no better symbol of the golden age of water, of the carefree, almost cavalier, attitude that our abundance has fostered. We go to the trouble and expense to find city-size quantities of water, build dams, reservoirs, and tanks to store it and plants to treat it, then we pump it out to customers, only to let it dribble away before anyone can use it.
One of the hallmarks of the twentieth century, at least in the developed world, is that we have gradually been able to stop thinking about water. We use more of it than ever, we rely on it for purposes we not only never see but can hardly imagine, and we think about it not at all. It is a striking achievement. We used to build monuments — even temples — to water. The aqueducts of the Roman Empire are marvels of engineering and soaringly elegant design. They were plumbing presented as civic achievement and as a tribute to the water itself. Today, water has drifted so far from civic celebration that many people visit the Roman aqueducts without any sense at all that they moved water, or how.
Many cities in the world are located where they are because of their proximity to water. For most of human history, in most settings, getting water was part of the daily routine; it was a constant part of our mental landscape. At the same time, humanity’s relationship to its water supply was wary, because water often made people sick. That’s why Poland Spring water was so popular in Boston and New York even a century ago — it was safe.
….
Our very success with water ushered in not just a golden age of water, but a century-long era in which water became increasingly invisible. Our home water bills, which are less than half our monthly cable TV or cell phone bills, provide almost no insight into how much water we use, or how we use it — even if we study them.
The new class of micropollutants we are beginning to hear about — infinitesimal, almost molecular, traces of plastics, birth control pills, antidepressants — have literally been invisible even to chemists until very recently; you certainly can’t tell if they’re in your water by looking at it or drinking it. The impact of those micropollutants on our health, if any, may remain invisible for years — and may be almost impossible to predict or trace.
Even our emotional connections to water have become submerged and camouflaged — the ease with which water enters and leaves our lives allows us an indifference to our water supply. We are utterly ignorant of our own water-mark, of the amount of water required to float us through the day, and we are utterly indifferent to the mark our daily life leaves on the water supply.
But the golden age of water is rapidly coming to an end. The last century has conditioned us to think that water is naturally abundant, safe, and cheap — that it should be, that it will be. We’re in for a rude shock.
We are in the middle of a water crisis already, in the United States and around the world. The experts realize it (the Weather Channel already has a dedicated burning-orange logo for its drought reports), but even in areas with serious water problems, most people don’t seem to understand. We are entering a new era of water scarcity — not just in traditionally dry or hard-pressed places like the U.S. Southwest and the Middle East, but in places we think of as water-wealthy, like Atlanta and Melbourne.
This is important.
(via sustainable-sam)
Gain more subsidies… these are all good!
Unlike most other power sources, which consume huge amounts of water that could be used much more productively for human consumption and agriculture, wind power generation does not use any water,” said Steve Sawyer, Secretary General of the Global Wind Energy Council, the leading international wind industry trade group, in a statement Tuesday.
Whereas the more than three-quarters of the current global electricity capacity requires water for cooling and condensing steam that ultimately drives turbines to generate electricity in conventional fossil fuel and nuclear power plants, wind power generation requires practically no water. Even most solar photovoltaic systems require some water to keep the panels clean and operating at peak efficiency (although this is not represented in the graph).
How much water are we talking about? While nuclear and certain types of coal and natural gas power generation will consume somewhere around 3 cubic meters of water per megawatt hour (3m3/MWh), wind uses 0.0 cubic meters of water, according to research from Danish wind energy giant, Vestas Wind.
All tolled, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that 20 percent of wind power on the U.S. grid by 2030 would save as much as 4 trillion gallons of water.
But the implications may be even more important for emerging economies where water and electricity scarcity already go hand-in-hand. If 40 percent of the world’s population already lives in water-stressed areas and populations in these areas grow and develop using traditional fossil-fueled plants, the water needed to operate the plants will put additional strains on a system already stretched thin. Under a business-as-usual scenario, according to a report by the Water Resources Group (pdf), global water demand is predicted to outpace water supply by 40 percent by 2030.
The long and short of it is that, except in ideal conditions, wind power is not a panacea and by no means represents the perfect stand-alone power source. But wind power also doesn’t require massive amounts of water to generate electricity, and that is a fact that is both undersold by the wind industry and undervalued by many policy makers and wind power opponents.
Now this is high technology…wow.
What’s better than trees? I’ll tell you: ROBOT TREES. Scientists at MIT have developed “artificial leaves” — small solar cells, about the size (though not the shape) of an oak leaf, that use a photosynthesis-like process to turn water into electricity. Only they do it 10 times more efficiently than natural leaves, and the electricity they produce can be used to power homes in the developing world. Trees: spanked.
The leaves are cheap to produce and can operate continuously for 45 hours, which gives them a lot of potential for powering homes in countries where energy infrastructure is prohibitively expensive. But we’d also like to see them used to build energy-producing roof gardens on apartment buildings, or to garland the brow of the 2050 Robot Poet Laureate.
For every action there is a reaction. The problems keep mounting for Japan… keep them in your thoughts, send good energy, they need it.
The Tokyo metropolitan government warned Wednesday that infants should not drink tap water as radioactive iodine exceeding the limit for them was detected in water at a purification plant.
