Attack on the EPA...

Back in
February (2011) congressional Republicans vowed to curb the authority and the
budget of the Environmental Protection Agency. And since that point they have
been attacking the agency to a degree not seen since President Richard Nixon
created it 40 years ago.

The EPA's effort to tackle the latest and perhaps most challenging
environmental problem - global warming - has made it a central target of the
new Republican leadership's antiregulatory agenda. In fact it appears that the
‘Political Hot-Potato’ …Global Warming is the issue. Having failed last year to
enact new legislation to curb global warming, the Obama administration is left
to use existing law - the Clean Air Act - to start reducing the pollution
causing the planet's temperature to rise. The Republicans however are not
committed to the concept of Global Warming…denying that it is even an issue,
and they have declared as a party that such actions would only raise
electricity prices and penalize industries that otherwise could be creating
jobs.

"Congress intends to reassert itself in the
statutory and regulatory process at EPA, and specifically the Clean Air
Act," said Rep. Ed Whitfield (R., Ky.), chairman of the subcommittee on
energy and power. He is a sponsor of a draft bill that would block the EPA from
using the law to control heat-trapping pollution.

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson told the panel
that the legislation "would eliminate portions of the landmark law that
all American children and adults rely on to protect them from harmful air
pollution."

During more than two hours of testimony, Jackson
said the law and overwhelming scientific evidence on global warming compelled
the EPA to act.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R.,
Mich.), the author of the draft bill, denied that it would limit the federal
government's ability to monitor and reduce health-damaging pollution.

A follow on attack on the EPA came from Newt Gingrich, the former House
speaker and a possible 2012 GOP presidential candidate. He called for
abolishing the EPA and replacing it with an organization more friendly to
business. The problem is that at the heart of business is the desire to make
profits…which I agree it should be…and regulations that require business to pay
for the pollution that they are generating reduces those profits.

Who should shoulder the cost of air and water cleanup? For instance if
business uses water in their production process…taking in clean water and
discharging dirty post production water…should the community have to suffer the
pollution, or even clean it up without the ability to recover their expenses
from the businesses at fault? The same question goes to air quality. If an
industry, like power generation which predominantly exists on coal fired
systems, pollutes the air in excess of current standards set by the EPA under
the past approval of our Government should the community suffer the pollution,
including the impact it may have on global warming…let’s call it climate change
(both hot and cold, storm and drought) …or pay to clean up the pollution
created by the responsible industry? When put in that light most would say no.

The EPA has a purpose, and the USA…has a responsibility to reduce
pollution in a meaningful way for the sake of all of our citizens, not only for
industries…especially those responsible for the pollution of our air, water,
and soil…who should be held accountable for the expense of meeting our
environmental standards during production or cleaning up the pollution that
they generate in their ‘for profit’ enterprise.

The PetroChemical Magic…may be dark magic…

If we use synthetic chemicals… often called ‘organic’ due to their carbon based structure, not due to their healthful nature… as herbicides and insecticides, should we assume that they will only track to the task at hand of killing a specific weed or insect? Or should we recognize that if thousands of pounds of these chemicals are sprayed into our air…to settle on crops, as well as the surrounding fields and streams… or lift up as an evaporate into the clouds to rain down onto some unsuspecting community meters or miles away?

Chemical treatment poses many interesting challenges. Our goal seems to be to eliminate one or two types of ‘pests’ that are attracted to our corps or plants (perhaps cucumbers, tomatoes, lilies, or roses), yet our method of application is often mass spraying or dusting that indiscriminately covers acres of land, including the streams and rivers that flow by and the communities in which we live.

If we look back to the point where chemists discovered these chemical weapons… for that was most often what they were developed for…to kill animals or to use on fellow man…we find that they were considered too deadly to use. Many of these chemicals were found as early as the 1870s… and were brought into full use in the first world war and used again in the second world war. It wasn’t until after World War II that corporations in Europe and the US began to create these chemicals in a form that was usable against “Pests” and not man… though many in the production and application industries were made ill and some died due to exposure.

What is amazing is that while the FDA may control what drugs and food we can use or put on our table, these herbicides and pesticides are not controlled on release… and only truly controlled if there is evidence that they cause health issues for man… say liver failure, or reproductive issues, or cancer… we actively engage these chemicals as part of our food chain…after all we are placing them into our soil or onto our food…and they spend weeks or months being taken into these plants and ultimately becoming part of them… later to become part of us… suspended in our organs, the fatty structures in our bodies, or altering the development of our bodies…and the bodies of our children… even infants who are the most susceptible to the impact that they promote.

Since the 1970s many pesticides have been banned due to demonstrated links to failing health in humans… but it may not stop with the termination of use, after all we have sprayed these chemicals for decades into our air, our water and onto our soil. It has had years to build up… compounding the problem especially where these chemicals don’t readily dissolve and break down.

Here is just one example of a chemical insecticide still in use in the USA. It is Endosulfan, which is an off-patent organochlorine insecticide and acaricide. This colorless solid has emerged as a highly controversial agrichemical due to its acute toxicity, potential for bioaccumulation, and role as an endocrine disruptor. Banned in more than 63 countries, including the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, and other Asian and West African nations, and being phased out in the United States, Brazil and Canada. It is still used extensively in many other countries including India and China. It is produced by Bayer CropScience, Makhteshim Agan, and Government-of-India–owned Hindustan Insecticides Limited among others. Because of its threats to the environment, a global ban on the use and manufacture of endosulfan is being considered under the Stockholm Convention.

In 2007, the EPA announced it was rereviewing the safety of endosulfan. The following year, Pesticide Action Network and NRDC petitioned the EPA to ban endosulfan, and a coalition of environmental and labor groups sued the EPA seeking to overturn its 2002 decision to not ban endosulfan. In June 2010, the EPA announced it was negotiating a phaseout of all uses with the sole U.S. manufacturer, Makhteshim Agan and a complete ban on the compound. As it turns out Endosulfan has the ability to persist in soil for decades…tens and tens of years… and it will continue to be taken into our bodies as we eat the wheat and corn…and all the other fields that it is used on… from the day it is removed from use in the USA…some five years from now.

The only manufacture of this pesticide for the US market is Makhteshim-Agan (mentioned above), a Global Petrochemical lab headquartered in Israel which has the largest generic distribution network in the world, comprising 43 marketing firms throughout the companies' markets in Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia, Pacific, Africa and the Middle East.

Even after Endosulfan is banned in the US it will continue to be used and its airborne and waterborne toxins will continue to cover our world…and due to the nature of fluid mass distribution…it will continue to rain down on use for years to come.

From a related tale...

You may or may not have
seen the story on 60 minutes (Sunday, 21st March) in regards to the use of
Carbendazim, Atrazine and Endosulfan on crops in Australia…http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/stories/1029050/poisoned .

The story was very concerning as a Fish Farmer ‘Gwen Gilson’ located in Noosa, QLD
gave her firsthand experience of the effects these chemicals, due to spray
drift, were having on her life….her neighbor is a Conventional Macadamia Nut
farmer….

These issues are not just concerns for the huge agribusinesses established and running crop production worldwide…but concerns for each of us small users as well. When you use those chemicals from Ace Depot …the ones you got yourself, or have them applied by a service company… you are often told that these pest products, when applied per the supplied rules, contain less than 0.5% active ingredient and are considered practically non-toxic at these dilutions.

The problem is that "non-toxic" isn’t necessarily true for these levels may far exceed the toxic levels for both good and bad insects alike. In fact .5% or one half of one percent would be equal to 5000 parts per million (ppm) in an industry where chemical toxicity is measured in less than 10ppm!Now you know why they put the little signs around your yard… toxic levels for your cats, dogs…and kids are near these application levels…and you are going to be effected if exposed.

Happy Earth Day!

Flowers are in bloom down here in Florida... some of the Northeast is just now breaking into spring... but for all of us... world wide, spring or fall... we are looking at our planet and celebrating Earth Day.

But what have you done about it? Saved any water, reduced your use of oil, recycled?

These are the things we can do locally... while we are pushing our politicians to ensure that we are working to clean up our act. Things like telling your Senators and Representatives (here in the USA) ...or Ministers in other nations... to block things like licenses to "Top Mountains" to access coal or create legislation that will prevent toxic Fracking... or act to clean up the Everglads and return wetlands in California or Virginia to their natural state...instead of pumping them down and killing their unique ecosystems.

We need to take Earth Day seriously... and you ...like me... need to act.

So...Happy Earth Day... let's make it count.

Is there balance between a healthy enviornment and a healthy economy?

Finding a balance between EPA Standards for a healthy environment and a healthy economy is considered difficult... heck, its downright political.

However, as it turns out, this balance is central to most of the emerging standards and protocols for what is being called Sustainability. In fact it goes further than that... it covers 3-Es... Environment - Economy - and Equity, where equity is the commitment to future generations and intentional processes that move to ensure that we maintain our planet in a conservative way so that future generations the world over can enjoy the same environment that we do today.

And many of the sustainability practitioners argue that there is even a forth E... and that stand for education.

They effectively propose that we need to educate ourselves to understand the importance of creating a sustainable culture to ensure that we successfully pass on an earth that is ecologically sound and diverse, with the ability for our progeny to work and enjoy a good lifestyle and with the tools in place to deliver the same or better conditions for their children and theirs beyond that.