The Bomb Plant

The P Reactor at the Savannah River Site
The P Reactor at the Savannah River Site

Thanks to funding from the Colombe Foundation, the Educational Foundation of America and an anonymous donor, National Security News Service reporters spent the last two years investigating the most secretive institution in the federal government: the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and its radioactive weapons facility – the Savannah River Site (SRS). Continue reading The Bomb Plant

Taking It to the Streets

At a time when science itself is under assault and the Environmental Protection Agency’s future is challenged, NASA scientist and global climate change awareness activist James Hansen spoke at the National Press Club on Monday in opposition to the proposed Keystone XL – a 1700-mile, $7 billion pipeline which would carry heavy crude oil from “tar sand” mines in Alberta, Canada, to refineries along the Texas and Louisiana coasts.

Environmental protesters have been picketing in front of the White House in opposition to the pipeline. On Friday, the State Department’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs issued its final environmental analysis that said TransCanada’s proposed pipeline will have “limited adverse environmental impacts.” The Obama administration is expected to approve or reject Keystone XL by the end of the year.

One of the Bureau’s responsibilities is representing the country on global climate change issues. Its website says:

The United States is taking a leading role in addressing climate change by advancing an ever-expanding suite of measures. We have initiated a number of polices and partnerships that span a wide range of initiatives from reducing our emissions at home to developing transformational low-carbon technologies to improving observations systems that will help us better understand and address the possible impacts of climate change. Our efforts emphasize the importance of results-driven action both internationally and domestically.

Hansen says the oil produced through this unconventional fossil fuel process is “extremely dirty stuff.” In its place, he supports instituting a $10 a ton tax on carbon for 10 years and giving these monies ($600 billion by his estimation) to American families to offset the costs of alternative energy sources. “Tax carbon and give the money to the people. That would stimulate the economy,” he says in response to a question about the jobs the pipeline project would create. He believes that giving money directly to families (he says between $6000 to $9000 per year) is better than previously pursued “cap and trade” policies that would be overtaken by big bank trading instruments.

He is joining several religious leaders today in Washington protesting the Keystone XL pipeline project. Their efforts are to draw attention to “the moral duty to preserve creation.”

He says in his meeting with Senator John Kerry about these issues, the senator called his ideas “unrealistic.” With the Obama administration’s support for the pipeline and leading Republican presidential candidates who do not believe global warning exists or, if it does, humans do not contribute to it, he is turning his attention away from politics and to grassroots advocacy to educate the public on climate change issues.

Hansen says the country is falling behind on alternative energy research and countries like China are investing in future technologies like solar, wind and nuclear. As a physicist, he supports pursuing “fourth generation” nuclear reactors as one of the few on-demand power sources that could meet the world’s energy needs. He believes new reactor designs will produce less waste that is dangerous only for decades rather than the waste current reactors generate that is dangerous for centuries and for which there is no permanent storage facility.

Read more at The Washington Post and The New York Times.

 

Airline Industry Fights European Union Carbon Cap

Over the last century, innovation in global air transport has opened the door for endless possibilities worldwide. Because of these innovations we get to explore new parts of the world, visit our favorite destinations, or meet with international colleagues and friends.

As someone who travels quite often, my own trips abroad have introduced me to people and exposed me to new issues and ideas. On some of these travels, I have witnessed how climate change has created new vulnerabilities in the agriculture sector because climate change is challenging farmers with increasingly unpredictable water supply and temperature extremes. I have met with farmers who are unable to grow food to feed their families because of the weather changes. I have met children who must stop going to school in order to spend time searching for water or helping to cultivate their families’ small farms. The impacts of climate change are devastating.

Few of us think about how much the very flights we take are actually contributing to the impacts of climate change. Yet, as the industry grows, their emissions may triple or quadruple in the next forty years.

In order to reduce the impact of airline travel on the environment, the European Union has created a law to cap carbon emissions from flights arriving to and departing from the EU. By selling a portion of pollution permits to airlines, the law also generates finance that can be used to help poor countries adapt to the impacts of climate change. This law – even as modest as it is – helps the airline industry to face the inevitable: when it comes to climate change, no one gets a free ride.

The EU law makes smart business sense. The Associated Press reported over Memorial Day weekend that fuel accounts for more than one-third of airline operating budgets this summer. Greener fleets and newer technologies like GPS systems to reduce flight paths exist and will reduce fuel costs, save money, and lower emissions – and airlines need to get serious about these steps now. The law requires that airlines reduce their emissions 3 percent below 2004-2006 levels by 2013 and 5 percent by 2020. Sooner or later the industry is going to have to face the challenge of lowering carbon emissions or consumers will face the consequences of climate impacts. Moreover, poor people in the United States and other countries will face the brunt of these impacts and yet have the least capacity to respond.

Sadly, instead of seizing an opportunity to develop further innovation in the airline industry, the Air Transportation Association of America (ATA), American Airlines, and United Airlines filed a lawsuit to exempt themselves from the law. The airlines are touting their environmental commitments while fighting measures to address climate change. Lawsuits, marketing and lobbyists will not make flight emissions go away.

The airlines aren’t the only entity fighting an opportunity; the Obama administration is too. Just recently the administration raised its strong objections to the EU law. This is unfortunate, as the EU law would actually help the United States meet its international climate commitments. Back in 2009, the U.S. government made a commitment to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. It also made a commitment to work with other countries to mobilize $100 billion per year for climate action in developing countries. The EU law would help the United States meet its international commitments to reduce emissions and generate finance. Of course, regulating the airline industry is only part of the solution, but it is a start.

Airlines and the U.S. government have a responsibility to reduce emissions which cause climate change and to support poor countries and communities who are experiencing the impacts of climate change. If the airlines can figure out how to fly us across the world, surely they can figure out how to do it in a more environmentally and socially conscious manner.

EPA Cuts Already Hurting States

In a deal to keep the government running, the Obama administration agreed to reduce this year’s Environmental Protection Agency budget by 16 percent. Many Tea Party Republicans celebrated the $1.6 billion cut to an agency they believe over regulates business. The Washington Post reports that most of the money is passed on to the states to help them meet federal guidelines. Many state environmental officials, already hard-pressed for funds, are finding it difficult to implement clean-water and drinking-water projects – the two programs that were cut. Bloomberg News ran a story on the same day that Dow Chemical Inc. wants to increase sales at its water unit more than 60 percent over the next five years by slashing the cost of its filtration technology. The story said, “Global demand for fresh water will exceed existing supplies by about 64 percent or 2.7 trillion tons by 2030 as populations increase and people move to cities where lifestyles use water more intensively, McKinsey & Co. estimates. Bridging that gap by upgrading pipelines and increasing water-processing capacity will require an investment of about $55 billion a year over the period, the consulting firm said.” Continue reading at The Washington Post and Bloomberg News.