Showing posts with label Artvoice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Artvoice. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Biodiversity and Climate Change Part II- WNY Primacy


Biodiversity and Climate Change Part 2

WNY Primacy

by Jay Burney

Preserve, Protect, and Defend, -biodiversity

In part 1, we explored that the fundamental cause of human created climate change is the eradication of biodiversity.  Eradication is enriched by the economic exploitation and the characterization of these resources as commodities.   The harvesting of forests and the use of our waterways as waste repositories have dealt fundamental blows to our planets ability to support life.  The ecological services provided by ecosystems are marginalized as economic “externalities”.  Ecological and social contexts have to be woven in to the sustainability equation with the real bottom line being biodiversity. A purely economic definition of “sustainable development” remains an oxymoron.  We have to change this.

The potential negative impact on our region’s biodiversity by climate change is substantial.  The positive contribution to atmospheric stability by biodiversity is fundamental science.  We must recognize the overwhelming significance of habitat destruction and the exploitation of natural resources. This is a very addressable strategy.

We Can
-Rethink, redefine, and react to fundamental causes of climate change. This will characterize the value of our current generations. 
-Identify, catalog and reverse the unprecedented human evisceration of biodiversity.
WNY is located in one of the most historically biodiverse regions on the planet. Our Great Lakes, rivers, creeks, streams, wetlands, forests, uplands, and meadows are vital components of a rapidly vanishing bioregion of global significance.
Although most of our natural assets have been urbanized or seriously altered by human activity there remain significant areas that are ecologically productive.   Most areas can return to ecological productivity with planning and investment.

The Sweetwater Seas
The Great Lakes contain nearly 1/5th of the world’s fresh surface water.
The Great Lakes Basin is a bioregion that supports nearly 10% of the US population and 25% of the population of Canada.  Urbanization, industry and agriculture have diminished our ecologically productive capacity.

Our waters are a valuable asset.   They face growing threats championed by economic activities with a laser focus on growth and development.  We can enhance our planets capacity to support life and atmospheric stability if we continue to provide opportunities for biodiversity.  But only if we engage conservation as a primary first line of defense.

One of the most significant threats to our waters involves waste treatment and disposal. For example, just seven sewer authorities throughout the Great Lakes including the Buffalo Sewer Authority (BSA) discharge almost 20 billion gallons of untreated sewerage and storm water through Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs). The BSA is responsible for releasing almost 2 billion gallons per year of our untreated material into the Niagara River, Buffalo River, Black Rock Canal, Scajaquada Creek and 52 other permitted outfalls. 

The good news is that currently the BSA has a 19 year plan developed in conjunction with RiverKeeper to address CSOs.  The BSA is one of the only sewer authorities in the Great Lakes with a “Green Infrastructure Plan”.  It comes with a $500 million plus price tag. 

The bad news is that the BSA plan is not enough and there is no guarantee that the money can be raised. Our culture is in a current suicidal cycle of downplaying infrastructure investments of this kind. Maybe we will build a new football stadium instead.

The bad news goes deeper with the BSA. It is a “self-permitting” Public Authority.  The BSA alone determines and monitors what it processes through its system.  This is not a unique situation. The political and economic underpinnings of a Public Authority give the BSA extraordinary legal powers and can keep public scrutiny at arms length. Contentious issues involving permitting disclosures  result.
-The BSA is the sole authority for Buffalo Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permits (BPDES), issues permits for “Trucked in Waste” and permits for “Temporary Discharges”.

While the BSA is on record as saying that it is doing nothing illegal, permit applicants “self-identify” the materials that they are seeking to discharge into the lake.
This means that the potential for deliberate or unintentional misidentification of materials permitted for release by private entities is there. Public scrutiny of these permits does not include public review of permit applications prior to permitting.
We would be shocked, just shocked if illegal activity takes place, but the potential is there.

A recent example of the kinds of problems that exist under this current system include an investigation of fracking wastewater permits undertaken by ArtVoice in the late winter of 2011-12.


Hydrofracking
Despite all the industry hype about the environmental benefits of a transitional natural gas economy, one of the least reported aspects of hydrofracking is that the activity releases huge amounts of methane, a less reported but highly significant greenhouse gas. Coupled with the documented consequences of using billions of gallons of water, concocting and injecting proprietary chemical soups that are highly toxic that appear in groundwater, aquifers, and other drinking water sources, hydrofracking is not the answer. Even on a purely economic basis hydrofracking does not live up to industry hype. Mix in the development of landscapes eaten by roads, well heads, lagoons, and other infrastructure demands, it becomes more clear that this energy strategy does not support biodiversity and is instead another nail in the coffin of atmospheric stability.

Land Use
Land use models that transcend traditional economic factors are being developed locally. Riverkeeper has  introduced a GIS land use database focusing on watersheds. This groundbreaking approach to identifying value is transforming our ability to promote conservation and protection. Other local working groups are focusing on expanding the concept and identifying areas that have  economically quantifiable ecological services values such as intact or partially intact ecosystems on both public and private lands. County Forests, parkland, land banks, abandoned farmland, trails, wood lots, and other areas are strategic places.
A new database approach could form the basis of quantifiable analysis of critical habitat and biodiversity generators. The objective is to create a tool to build upon traditional land use concepts that help citizens and governments determine planning, zoning, conservation, and land protection. One potential outcome is incentives that would target keeping public and private land ecologically productive.

Buffalo Waterfront
We can recreate an ecologically productive waterfront by avoiding industrial, commercial or inappropriate mixed use development.  Only if we make significant public investments does this land become valuable land for the developers. Instead of driving profits just to the developers, lets invest in an economic plan that benefits a broader spectrum.

By concentrating development on the downtown side of the river and harbor and we will build a better city. The outer harbor should remain as open space with public access. How about a National Marine Sanctuary just off shore? An economic plan that encourages conservation through recreational and tourism will make us wealthier as a sustainable community.

Urban Greenscaping
Community owned lands such as parks and streetscapes can contribute to biodiversity. If you have a yard you can make a difference.  Here is how- Learn about the kinds of beneficial animals such as pollinators, local birds, and butterflies that depend on native plants, and then landscape with those plants! There are plenty of local organizations that promote this kind of gardening. One word of caution, -avoid using native plants in rain gardens that collect street runoff.  Toxic materials from automobiles, lawn chemicals and other poisons can accumulate in these gardens and if you are using plants that attract native butterflies, birds, and bees, they will absorb the toxins, which can be counterproductive.


Saturday, March 24, 2012

Injustice in America, States Rights and the return to a poll tax.


GreenWatch

Injustice in America, States Rights and the return to a poll tax.

By Jay Burney

If you thought that the modern Republican Party is just about being anti-women with anti-contraception and invasive vaginal probe legislation tied to women’s medical decisions, you are wrong. Think again. They are anti-education, anti-environmental, anti labor, and anti-democracy. They are also against the historic civil rights that transformed America in the 1960’s.  Modern republicans are ushering us back to a time of Jim Crow.

Between 1876 and when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965 were implemented by the Federal government, the United States, especially many of the southern states, made racial segregation the law of the land.  The civil rights and liberties of African Americans were targeted by what are known as Jim Crow laws that codified racial segregation of public schools, public places, transportation, restrooms, drinking fountains, bank lending, job discrimination, and military segregation. Among the Jim Crow laws were “poll taxes” collected by several southern states from residents that wished to vote. These highly discriminatory “taxes” heavily and disproportionately impacted minorities especially African Americans, Native Americans, and the poor. If you couldn’t pay the taxes you couldn’t vote. You were disenfranchised. The Civil rights and Voting Rights Acts helped to put an end to that injustice.

If you do not know about this stuff, you really don’t know much about American history including the legacy of  Martin Luther King. He died fighting the institutional racism that characterized ( and often still characterizes) America.

You may have heard of the “southern strategy”. This is an American political term that has long characterized how national leadership has dealt with discrimination and segregation issues.  During the Civil Rights movement, democrats were able to both embrace the civil rights movement and to empower a newly emerging class of voters in the south. The strategy resulted in national and local election victories that were embodied in a 90% democratic enrollment by southern black voters.

This strategy helped lead a transformation of America into a place of more hope, more justice, and more equality. The world seemed a better place and America was taking the lead.

Today, the Republican Party is turning back the clock. Among other things they are returning to a “southern strategy” that is predicated on the exploitation of anti-African American racism, misogyny, fear, and the characterization of “States rights” as a panacea for the perceived evils that infest the Federal government. This is a thinly disguised but effective attack on women, minorities, the poor, the elderly, labor, education, students, economic and environmental regulations, and the fundamental freedoms, rights, and liberties that so many have fought and died for. It is a disingenuous and cynical strategy at best. The fundamentalist republican’s use the argument of  “potential voter fraud” as the foundation for requiring voter ID. This despite the fact that studies done in the past decade by the Federal Government find that less than .003% of voter fraud has been found nationwide. Despite that 38 states have advanced bills requiring voter ID.

In recent months, several states including Mississippi, Texas, Alabama, Indiana, Tennessee, Kansas, South Carolina, and Wisconsin have passed discriminatory voting practices, including voter ID laws. All of these come with real cash costs to the voters whom have to purchase the ID’s, purchase paperwork supporting the ID’s, and often travel great distances to access places where the ID’s are sold.

The Brennan Center for Justice estimates that if fully enacted, these laws could prohibit as many as 5 million otherwise eligible voters from participating in the next Presidential election. A preponderance of those affected will be people of color.

Because of this countries historic racial discrimination including voter rights atrocities traced back to Jim Crow and the prohibitive poll tax requirements, states that are trying to reintroduce new discriminatory voting regulations have to be approved by either the Justice Department or a Federal Judge.  Despite fundamentalist attempts to disembowel the federal government it still plays a role protecting our rights and liberties.

The states rights lie embodied in voter ID legislation is an attempt at a political power grab backed by an oligarchic empire that has outsourced, downsized, and disenfranchised the American dream. And they still like to refer to this dung heap of an idea “a shining city on a hill”.  American Exceptionalism indeed.
Here are profiles of some of the states that have enacted voter ID legislation.

Mississippi
Mississippi’s population is 59 % white and 37% black, and 2.7% Hispanic.  In November Mississippi voters approved a state constitutional amendment requiring all voters to have an approved photo ID such as a drivers license before they could vote.  The “make voting harder” amendment to the Mississippi State Constitution passed with a 62% plurality.  Opponents of the amendment say that the ID requirement will make it harder for the elderly, the disabled and poor and African American residents to vote. Among other issues is the actual cost of a driver’s license or photo ID and access to agencies that can provide these items to a fundamentally rural poor population, which is disproportionally African American.

Election results show that the amendment was very popular amongst white voters, and not so popular amongst African Americans.

Many thousands of people, including ¼ of all Mississippi African Americans in Mississippi do not have photo ID’s or easy access to them.

The law had not been enacted by the March 13 Republican Presidential primary election where 97% of the voters were white.  The Republican controlled Mississippi legislature decided not to pass the rules that will govern the voter ID process until after the Republican primary.  Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, a white republican and the states chief election officer said that it is the goal of legislatures to make sure that the rule is in effect for the Presidential elections, when African Americans are sure to try to vote. Hoseman was asked by a reporter on Republican primary day what he would say to opponents of the law and he said with a laugh “get over it”. The Justice Department or a Federal Judge will have to approve the new rules before they go into effect.

Texas
The federal government is also scrutinizing a new texas law that requires photo id in order to vote.
According to the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice, the new Texas law will prohibit up to 800,000 otherwise legally entitled voters from participating in the Presidential election. Other critics put that number well over 1 million.  According to Texas own data, a Hispanic voter in Texas is almost 50% more unlikely to meet the requirements to obtain the id, which include a minimum of $22 to purchase the documentation to get the Voter ID. The DOJ asked the State to offer some proof of voter fraud in Texas, and the state could nor provide any evidence On March 12 the Justice Department decided that the Poll tax made the Texas law illegal. Texas Governor Rick Perry is now suing the Federal government and seeks immediate implementation of the new law.

South Carolina
Just before Christmas the Justice Department rejected a South Carolina Law making it difficult for minorities to vote. The state is now challenging the Federal ruling and attorneys handling the case for the state have declared that it will cost South Carolina taxpayers more than $1million to prosecute the case, especially if it has to go to the Supreme Court. The return to Jim Crow is costly, but apparently the good white folks in South Carolina are glad to anti up to pay the piper.

Wisconsin
Almost 150 years after the United States fought the Civil War, and this is not just an issue of the south.
According to state democratic leaders, more than 250,000 Wisconsin voters are disenfranchised by the voter ID law.

Republican Gov Scott Walker’s administration who initiated anti-union legislation that turned the state inside out also initiated voter ID requirements.  Recently a State Judge placed a permanent injunction on the law.  The Judge said that over a quarter of a million Wisconsin voters who would other wise be eligible to vote, many of whom are democrats, would be prohibited from voting under the new rules, which would cost the individual voters money. Besides the photo id costs, the costs of transportation and lost wages for a day spent chasing down paperwork could cost individuals more than $100 each. 

Selma to Montgomery
You may have heard that Al Sharpton recently led a march with his National Action Network recreating the historic civil rights Marches between Selma and Montgomery Alabama to protest the new making it harder to vote laws.  Sharpton calls the new laws Jim Crow on steroids, saying that they are more polished and sophisticated and pretend to fix a problem that does not exist.  Sharpton says that the underlying rhetoric promoting these laws focus on voter fraud, are themselves fraudulent arguments designed to disenfranchise voters and not to strengthen the democratic process.

It seems that fundamentalist Republicans have no qualms about exploiting racial fears with a new radicalism that will bring our country to its knees. The game plan here is becoming more obvious with each passing day.

If you are wondering what this all has to do with you, and you live in Buffalo, there is a good chance that you are not a person of color. According to 2011 US Census data, the Buffalo Metro area is the 6th most racially segregated area in the United States.  Our African American population is concentrated in the urban core of Buffalo while almost all of the suburban and rural areas are white.  This puts us on the cutting edge of the future of civil rights in America.  You may not know that the Jim Crow laws that have been inspired by the republican fundamentalists are making their way into your life today, but if they get a hold in the southern strategy states it wont be long before you will be asked to take a position. Much of Buffalo’s urban population has experienced a lifetime of racism.  As America rapidly descends into its Jim Crow past, what will you do?


ALEC The American Legislative Exchange Council

ALEC is a powerful corporate funded action organization that is behind all of the voting laws discussed in this article.  ALEC authors and promotes legislation in local and federal legislatures that further a corporate agenda reflecting smaller government, tax breaks for the rich, and legislation that is anti –environmental , anti-labor, anti-education, and a wide plethora of issues that  benefit the conservative agenda.

ALEC is organized across the America, has introduced bills in every State legislature, and is funded secretly by private corporate interests organized by the Koch Brothers. According to the organization Media and Democracy which revealed over 800 ALEC sponsored bills in July of 2011, ALEC is reshaping our democracy by financially supporting legislators that take the model bills created by ALEC and introducing them and or voting for them in the political bodies that they represent.  

For more on ALEC and voting Rights:



ALEC Exposed, Rigging Elections, The Nation, July 2011

Boom and BUST


GreenWatch

Boom and BUST

The Lies About Jobs
The legacy news media has a lot to say about the positive impacts of natural gas development in New York State. Like many others, you may be convinced that the economic upside of shale gas includes many jobs and a resurgent economy.

You are very wrong if you believe this. Most of the economic projections come from industry oriented propaganda. Industry that stands to profit dramatically if New York State allows hydrofracking. Not by creating jobs, not by building local economies, but by extracting wealth and leaving behind a legacy of destruction.

Last summer the New York State DEC published a draft generic supplemental environmental impact statement that was paid for by taxpayer dollars. A local WNY company, Ecology and Environment (E&E), which has extensive ties to the oil and gas industry produced an economic assessment that was contained in the publically funded document.  In it E&E stated that an average NYS shale gas development scenario would bring 53,969 jobs.  Food and Water Watch, an organization opposed to hydrofracking published an independent analysis last November entitled “New York State Exaggerated Potential Job Creation from Shale Gas Development.”  It states that the E&E projections are “deeply flawed“ and that “in the first year of an average scenario only 195 new jobs would be created for NYS residents and that “after 10 years only 600 jobs”. After the 10th year there would be almost no more new jobs created”.

The E&E analysis mirrors industry claims and has been repeated over and over while the Food and Water Watch report, and many other independent assessments that support the critical analysis have been ignored by legacy media. “Truth” and fair and balanced information is a commodity bought and sold to the highest bidder and delivered into your living room by uncritical “news” operations that have a bottom line that does not often include investigation, analysis, or even critical thinking.

Boom
Generally speaking, the gas boom can be characterized as a short term accelerated production cycle. The initial development activities are massive and carry many real and environmental costs that are borne by the local communities.  Impacted communities are always unprepared to adjust to increased and cyclic populations. North Dakota experienced a significant boom due to natural gas operations in 2011 and has also experienced a dark side.

Williston ND saw its population grow from 14,500 people in 2010, to over 20,000 in late 2011. According to a Bloomberg report published this last January, “North Dakota Oil Boom Brings Blight with Growth as Costs Soar” the sudden boom created a housing shortage.  Rents for a two-bedroom home without utilities skyrocketed from $350 a month to over $2,000.  Five hotels and 1,200 new apartments are being built.  Meanwhile some workers and their families are living in their cars, while others are gathering in what are being called “man-camps” – temporary shelters including tents and trailers. Some counties have banned these man camps citing lack of sewer, electrical, and water systems, increased crime rates, and increased prostitution among other social issues.

While the Oil and Gas industry provided Williston with $1.5 million “oil extraction tax”  in 2011, infrastructure costs continue to soar.   The community is looking at spending $87 million to provide three new schools for the approximate 1,500 new students this year. This is an approximate 57% increase in what the local schools were designed to hold. Roads designed to handle 10 tractor trailer trucks a day now are being used by over 800 a day. Montrail County’s road system which has been so completely overburdened by the enormous truck traffic needs $600 million just to keep the roads open. Calls to Montrail County volunteer ambulance and fire services has tripled since 2009.


Bust and Despair
Imagine a ghost town with its ruined and abandoned buildings and streets inhabited by the wretched ghosts of its former residents.  This well-known scenario is based on oil and mineral extractions.  The rush and boom is always followed by collapse. Collapse stays forever. Whatever residents remain pay for the boom with expansive poverty and the inability to maintain basic services and infrastructure. The resultant cultural collapse is a Santorum (google it) scenario that we should all be prepared for if NYS allows fracking.

The long-term bust is characterized by broken and impoverished rural communities. According to Chris Burger of the Sierra Club Atlantic Gas Task Force one of the principle downsides of economic impacts in a fracking area is a loss of diversity of jobs.  Tourism and recreation jobs almost completely disappear as those industries are devastated by the blight caused by gas drilling sites and infrastructure.  Agriculture is seriously impacted by drilling activities and studies have shown that in communities that allow fracking up to 50% of family owned farms are put out of business.

A Cornell University report “Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling: What does it mean for Economic Development concludes that short term boom is always followed by long term bust. Good long-term jobs are not created in drilling communities. Other good jobs migrate away.  Economic diversity declines, as communities cannot attract investment from non-extraction industries.

Add these economic development lies on top of the catastrophic environmental issues created when the waters that we depend on become contaminated, and undrinkable. Your drinking water will be affected. Add this to the costs of the remediation, the lack of remediation, and the to costs of the consequences of human health impacts. Add these inevitable consequences of the depravation and predation by the few that will gain economically to the many that will suffer long term economic consequences and you have to wonder how on earth, we has a culture can have the political, social, or moral will to allow hydrofracking.

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Why Western New York needs to have a public hearing about Hydrofracking


By Jay Burney, GreenWatch

In case you have not heard about it, New York State is currently evaluating whether or not to allow a controversial natural gas drilling process called hydrological fracking to take place across the state. This process allows extracting of natural gas from certain shale formations that lie underneath N.Y, including Marcellus and Utica Shale, both which are found below parts of WNY.  NYS is accepting public comments on the matter until January 11.  You can submit your comment by going here:

http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/76838.html

The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation has held several public hearings on the issue across New York State. But not in Buffalo or Niagara Falls.  Our proximity to the shale, and the potential social, economic, and environmental impacts of this process on WNY should be a compelling reason for the NYS DEC to hold public hearings on this matter here. They have chosen not to. It is very likely that unless the DEC extends its public comment period on the process beyond the January 11th deadline and opts to hold a public hearing in or near Buffalo, a coalition of concerned citizens and groups may very well hold a “peoples hearing” to better alert the local press and to inform the DEC of the “opinions” of citizens in the WNY region.

One of the many reasons that the process of hydrofracking is controversial because it uses toxic chemicals which are injected into the ground under high pressure and at high volume. There is widespread concern and growing evidence that these chemicals will enter water supplies and aquifers and render the freshwater unusable and toxic to life, including humans. This is important to the people of WNY as it could effect our drinking water and the Great Lakes which are an increasingly valuable global resource representing about 20% of the earths fresh surface water and about 100% of our regions sustainable future.

Only some of the at last 300 chemicals that are used are known to the public.  They include  methanol, ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, naphthalene, benzene, toluene and xylene. They are known to be endocrine disrupters, cancer-causing agents, or cause other negative human health impacts including respiratory ailments and birth defects. These chemicals have been found widely in drinking water and in aquifers near gas fields and wells.

The drilling companies consider other chemicals used as secret proprietary formulas and they will not release these formulas to the public for scrutiny. This is of some consequence.

According to a local anti-fracking group, Re-Energize Buffalo (http://renewnrg.blogspot.com/2011/03/radioactivity-in-wastewater-from-shale.html)
 In 2009, NYSDEC analyzed 13 samples of fracking wastewater from gas drilling sites in the Marcellus Shale and found levels of radioactive radium as high as 267 times the safe limit for discharge into the environment and thousands of times the limit safe for people to drink. Studies conducted in Pennsylvania confirm those findings an have revealed some drinking water near fracking operations to contain radium at over 1,000 times higher than federal safe drinking water standards. In addition
Environmental and health professionals, as well as citizen activists around the United States share concerns that fracking with these contaminates will destroy the fresh water that life depends on, that we drink, and that our food supply requires. They are asking for more scientific analysis and that NYS proceed with great caution until there is more quantifiable information. The U.S. EPA is still engaged in evaluation of the safety of fracking and will not publish its findings until at least 2013. The potential multiplier effects of introducing known and unknown toxins into our water could be catastrophic for us and for future generations.

Proponents of the drilling process, mostly energy companies, engineering firms and law firms that will benefit from the extraction, argue that proposed regulations in New York mandate that the companies disclose proprietary formula’s to the DEC for appropriate review and that all well sites and associated water sources will be appropriately monitored and tested. Opponents including some DEC staff members say that the DEC is not equipped to oversee the number of wells that may be drilled, and that it is unlikely that enough money will every be appropriated to handle the regulatory oversight needed to insure even a modicum of safety for water sources.

Apparently New York State shares these concerns albeit at this time on a limited basis. The NYSDEC has already determined that they will not allow hydrofracking to proceed in the areas that make up both the New York City and Syracuse watersheds. WNY watersheds are not protected by the same rules.
Another reason that WNY deserves a public hearing is that when Governor Cuomo appointed an advisory panel early last summer to help the state evaluate economic and environmental consequences of hydrofracking, he neglected to appoint a single member from WNY.

Robert Knoer, Chair of the WNY Environmental Alliance which is comprised of 80 WNY environmental organizations, writing on behalf of the alliance noted in a letter to Gov. Cuomo in July:
I must however express our concern that there are no representatives of the Western New York region on the panel.  While acknowledging that this is not a "regional" panel I note that there has been a natural dichotomy created by the proposed SGEIS.  The current proposed course of action distinguishes among watersheds: Disturbance around the New York City and Syracuse watersheds from hydrofracking activities is unacceptable within a 4000 foot buffer.  However when addressing the Primary aquifers that dominate upstate non-filtered water supplies the DEC determined that "Horizontal extraction of gas resources underneath the Primary Aquifers from well pads located outside this area (500 feet) would not significantly impact this valuable water resource" (dSGEIS Executive Summary pg. 18).
There appears to be a distinction, albeit perhaps unintentional, of the impact of the state policy between Western New York and downstate aquifers.  As such, we feel it is appropriate that the Western New York environmental concerns be fully and thoroughly vetted as this discussion proceeds.”
As of January 1, 2012, there has been no response to this letter.

Another reason for concern to WNY’ers is the proposal to accommodate fracking wastewater at the Niagara Falls N.Y. reprocessing plant. A portion of the hydrofracking fluid injected into wells is recoverable. This fluid needs to be treated before it is released. This fall the Niagara Falls  N.Y. Water Board which oversees the city’s wastewater treatment facilities decided to explore the financial benefits of taking fracking wastewater, treating it, and discharging it into the Niagara River.  There are serious and fundamental questions about whether or not the Niagara Falls facility can handle the known and unknown toxins and these are issues that citizens are demanding to be aired in a public hearing.  Dumping fracking wastewater into the Niagara River where it will eventually flow into the Atlantic Ocean is an issue that needs intense scrutiny. 

Last week (December 27), a coalition of 82 Mayor’s from around the Great Lakes called on provincial, state, and federal governments to hold public hearings for “utmost transparency and disclosure” when it comes to the potential impact of fracking waste on Great Lakes waters.  http://niagaraatlarge.com/2011/12/27/great-lakes-mayors-raise-concern-about-proposed-fracking-waste-discharge-to-niagara-river/
The Niagara Falls Water Board has recently hired a PR firm to handle “questions” about the issue. Great.

False Jobs and Real Economic Consequences
Advocates of fracking including politicians, lobbyists, the energy industry and the engineering and law firms that will benefit economically from hydrofracking have used a “jobs” as the principle public argument to allow hydrofracking in New York State. Food & Water Watch, a national organization dedicated to safe food and water issued a challenge to the “jobs creator” theory in a November 2011 report entitled “New York State Exaggerated Potential Job Creation from Shale Gas Development.”

The report states:” The oil and gas industry, industry-funded academics, and ideological think tanks have promoted shale gas development as a sure-fire job creator in difficult economic times. Proponents of shale gas development have benefited from media and U.S. government reports in which the supposed economic benefits have gone unquestioned. Food & Water Watch recently analyzed one industry-backed job projection and found that it overstated shale gas job creation potential in New York by a factor of about 900 percent.

The report states that the NYS economic analysis report originally produced by Ecology and Environment, a Buffalo based engineering firm with strong ties to the oil and gas industry, predicted that an average NYS shale gas development scenario would bring 53,969 jobs.  Food and Water Watch says that these projections are “deeply flawed”.  For instance, close inspection of the footnotes revealed that that projection was based on a 30-year production scenario. According to the Food and Water Watch report, 30 years of production is an inflated scenario.  Currently the U.S Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether or not shale gas companies have overestimated the productivity of shall gas wells.

Under the Food and Water Watch recalculated the New York analysis and concludes that in the first year of an average scenario only 195 new jobs would be created for NYS residents, and that after 10 years only 600 jobs. After the 10th year there would be almost no more new jobs created. The first year scenario would impact one fortieth of one percent of New Yorkers currently on unemployment.
The report says that the E&E report misuses the multiplier effects and the indirect job creation scenarios in ways that exaggerate the economic spillover from the jobs. The report also points out that E&E has close ties to the oil and gas industry.

In addition the F&W report states that the NYS analysis fails to account for the negative impacts that drilling and fracking would have on employment in other industries such as tourism and agriculture. These kinds of multiplier effects are shoved under the rug.

The report states: “Close examination of this job projection shows that allowing for such extensive shale gas development in New York would actually have a minimal impact on employment in the near term, primarily because most jobs would go to employees from out-of-state. Shale gas development would not provide the broad- based economic growth that New York now needs and that the industry has promised they could deliver. Instead, shale gas development would primarily benefit the oil and gas industry while bringing significant costs to public health, public infrastructure, and the environment.”
These costs presumably would be borne by the taxpaying public.

The Food and water Watch report concludes “The New York socioeconomic impact analysis, conducted by E&E Inc., fails to provide an accurate projection of the potential benefits of opening up the state to drilling and fracking for shale gas. By exaggerating the potential benefits, New York has failed to serve the public interest. In reality, current residents of New York can only expect intensive shale gas development to create several hundred new shale gas industry jobs for each of the first 10 years, followed by far fewer production jobs created for the next 20 years.


In late December, the Legislative Gazette, an Albany based newspaper covering NYS government, reported that three economists Jannette M. Barth, Senior economist at the Pepacton Institute LLC; Edward C Kokkelenberg, a research fellow at the School for Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell, and Timothy Mount, Economics Professor at Cornell sent a letter to Governor Cuomo that also detailed why the E&E economic survey provided to the State is flawed. The letter reads in part:
"The state's economic focus should be the realistic identification and estimation of the present value of all costs and benefits to the state and its citizens.” "The state should be concerned with maximizing the present value of the benefits to the State and minimizing the present value of all costs to the State and its citizens. The gas industry will strive to maximize the present value of the benefits to themselves and postpone costs, or more likely, make others pay the costs."

The Gazette interviewed Jannette Barth, one of the authors of the letter.
"(The E&E report) didn't take into account costs of wear and tear of roads and infrastructure,"  She said that the state's Department of Transportation circulated a memo from July detailing the potential damage fracking and well construction could do to roads and other infrastructure, especially from truck traffic.
"The research findings done by independent studies are vastly different from industry research," Barth said, saying that any study of fracking should be done not by any single agency, but a team of individual experts on all the ways that fracking could impact the economy and the environment.

"What we really, really need is the state DEC to insist on a comprehensive unbiased peer-reviewed environmental impact statement, based on data that is either published, or carefully scrutinized or verified because the industry has a bias in this," Barth said.

It is important that the DEC extend the public comment period beyond the current January 11 deadline, hold a public hearing in WNY, and extend the moratorium on issuing drilling permits until at least after the USEPA finishes its ongoing study about the safety and health impacts of hydrofracking.  If this is not done, there will be a public hearing in Buffalo, conducted by citizens, and you will be invited to say your piece.

A Sepulcher of Profit/Poisoned by Profit

From August, 2011

By Jay Burney, Founder of GreenWatch and the Learning Sustainability Campaign

(Authors Note: August 10, 2011 has been declared a National Day of Action by a variety of organizations in order to promote the Safe Chemicals Act if 2011. According to the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families Coalition, the Act, now before Congress, would help to Protect Americans from persistent bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals.

These disease causing human-made poisons accumulate in living organisms, last for years, and can travel long distances through wind, water and other media. (For More Information: www.saferchemicals.org)

Our Stolen Future, and Poisoned by Profit combine to tell one of the fundamental Environmental Justice stories of our times.

In the late summer of 2011 life on earth continues to be assaulted by and exposed to a wide variety of man made toxins. The Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 languishes before an inept and hostile Congress. The Act, an overhaul of the ancient Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 would both protect Americans and allow the United States to join three important international treaties based around the Stockholm Convention of Persistent Organic Pollutants signed by 174 nations.  According to The Healthy Families Coalition the passage of this Act would allow the United States to lead international efforts rather than stand by while allies and trading partners make important decisions. Why is this Act languishing and why is Congress hostile?  One can assume that it is an economic decision based on conservative politics that promote profit for the few above all other principles.

Next June it will be 50 years since Rachael Carson wrote and published “Silent Spring.” This authoritative book linked the creation of poisons and pesticides to widespread animal mortality. Carson accused the chemical industry and public officials of creating an abomination of disinformation and the public of a lack of critical thinking. This deadly mix of poisons for profit and the gaming of the systems by industry and public officials has only gotten worse.

In more recent years other books and studies have been published that back up what Carson called irresponsible economic and public policies.

In 1996 a very important and fundamental book written by a team of authors lead by Dr. Theo Colburn introduced us to some of the terrible consequences of our chemically infused society. 

The book, Our Stolen Future, Are we Threatening our Fertility, Intelligence and Survival?” is full of detailed research. In 2011 science continues to back up and expand upon the basic findings that man-made chemicals in our environment are causing catastrophic damage to our bodies and our lives.
Colbern is an environmental health analyst known for her work in endocrine disruption.   “Our Stolen Future” is essentially a detective story detailing how man-made chemicals in our environment are causing catastrophic human health effects.  Consequences include endocrine disruption, birth defects, reduced disease resistance, diminished fertility, and compromised intelligence and behavior. This book shook society when it was first published, and if you have not heard of it, you should check it out online. www.ourstolenfuture.org.

More recently another extraordinary book “Poisoned for Profit –How Toxins are making our Children Chronically Ill” has been published by Chelsea Green Publishing.  In it, former New York Times chief environmental reporter Philip Shabekoff and his wife, the widely accomplished family and consumer activist Alice Shabekoff, investigate and chronicle how our economic policies have submerged our planet in a thickening haze of toxic soup. It tells of how most of these poisons that have been made for profit come into our bodies from little studied exposure routes. The statistics in this book are shocking. It tells us that today in the United States “one in three children are born sick”. Most of these children will endure life long consequences of disease. This may be the most fundamental failure of human stewardship in the last 100 years.

The book identifies sources of these illnesses by comprehensively describing the health effects of exposure to industrially “produced for profit” toxics.   Like “Our Stolen Future”, this book details health consequences that include a widening array of birth defects, cancers, asthma, obesity, diabetes, mental and behavioral abnormalities, and other serious illnesses.

The author’s research that shows that the blood of newborns contain traces of nearly 300 synthetic chemicals. Milk from virtually every mother on the planet contains high levels of dozens of man-made poisons. Breast milk by almost all accounts is superior to other infant food, but the increase of toxins in breast milk is alarming. Other researchers have estimated that each human on the planet may contain traces of at least 700 human made toxins. 

According to the National Cancer Institute, half of all men and women living today will have cancer at sometime in their lives. One-eighth of all women will be diagnosed with breast cancer. These diseases are strongly linked to human made toxins and environmental exposures. These diseases still our souls and fundamentally inhibit our ability to hope. We must find ways to be better stewards of ourselves.
Perhaps more significant than the biological effects that are chronicled in Poisoned For Profit, this book describes how these toxic products enjoy a complicated and dense web of legal protections. It details how private sector money has purchased highly paid lobbyists, scientists for hire, politicians, and policy makers to trick the public, often working secretly and behind the scenes, and almost always providing no accountability. It shows how legal and marketing strategies of gaming of the regulatory and safety systems has allowed the modern plague of profitable poisons.  

Unless you are tuned in, you don’t hear much about this. Instead we hear the loud shouts that there is too much regulation and that environmental and other regulations hurt growth, hurt the economy, hurt jobs, and hurt our future. Most regulatory agencies are on the modern chopping block. This is just one of the ways that our political leaders are feeding the hidden hands that underpin, and undermine our economic health.

Rachael Carson focused a great deal on the consequences of pesticides on both human health and on the lives of birds and insects. Her work is often considered one of the founding points of modern environmentalism.  Unfortunately in the decades since, industry has established new ground, created new products, and in recent years has continued almost unchallenged in developing a toxic legacy that we may not be able to escape. Critical environmental thinking today brings into focus the dual challenges of climate change and the ever-increasing loss of biological diversity that underpins life on earth. Whether on not humans can survive either or both is the scientific, ecological, economic, and social challenge of our and the next generations.

The Vanishing of the Bees.
In August of 2010 a Buffalo based not for profit hosted a seminar at Alfred State College focused on Colony Collapse Disorder, a disease affecting commercial honeybees. “CCD” as it is known, has swept across the planet and has resulted in the death and destruction of up to 80% of commercial honeybee colonies.  According to the USDA, the US has been hard hit. This is important because these pollinators provide services to 90% of our plant based food crops and the services are worth approximately $15 billion annually.

The New York Sustainable Agriculture Working Group (NYSAWG) partnered with Alfred, the Penn State University Center for Pollinator Research, and the USDA Agricultural Research Services Honey Bee Pollination Lab in Tucson and invited WNY beekeepeers, honeymakers, and others interested to come and hear the most recent findings regarding why the bees are vanishing. 

Judy Einach, executive director of NYSAWG told us that WNY agriculture reflects the national statistics. Agriculture is still one of the most significant areas of regional wealth and the impact of honeybees and pollinator services is an issue here as it is elsewhere.  In 2007 New York’s 36,350 farms had combined sales of $4.4 billion. 

The conference focused on updating attendees on current scientific knowledge about CCD.  The main message is that widespread human made toxins are underlying the decline in health and ultimate disappearance of domesticated bee colonies.

This is controversial because the creation and use of these toxins have become the backbone of agriculture worldwide. The manufacture of just about every product on earth is dependent on the use of man-made chemicals.   Industry and government regulators do just about anything they can to justify the use of chemicals. The United States is a leading nation in the manufacture and approval of chemical poisons, sometimes hiding behind a curtain of industry justified “proprietary ingredients” that do not bear up under scientific and public scrutiny. Sometimes these chemicals hiding behind the misleading term of “inert ingredients.” You would think that inert ingredients mean “safe.” They are anything but.
Penn State researcher Mary Anne Frasier and her team has scrutinized of the impact of these toxins on honeybees. “These bees are testing for multiple chemicals, and we are just learning that the many and often complicated biological interactions that are stimulated by these toxins are seriously impacting the health of individual bees and colonies.”

“For instance, we are finding that it is not just the active ingredients that cause damage.” The other ingredients  or “inerts” are not as well studied. Inerts can include solvents, preservatives, and other substances and can be highly toxic.

“The inerts and the combinations of the ingredients, and in combination with other toxins pose significant dangers,” said Frasier.  “Multiple exposures to combinations of both active and inactive ingredients and other chemicals that bees are exposed to may be a central reason behind CCD”.

I asked about other sources of these chemicals.  “They are everywhere!” she said.  Indeed they are. We live in a world saturated with man-made toxins. Water, soils, cultivated plants and wild plants, even the air is full of toxins. These man-made toxins affect the biology of all living things, including beneficial insects and other pollinators, birds, fish, plants and on up the food chain to humans. The honeybees are but a shocking harbinger of the kind of biological effects that life on the planet is experiencing. Just read Silent Spring, Our Stolen Future, and Poisoned by Profit.

Rust Never Sleeps
Agriculture is just the tip of the iceberg. Virtually every product produced and consumed comes with a toxic legacy that we are only beginning to understand. This endless list of products includes cleaners, cosmetics, clothing, furniture, soaps, paints, paper, plastics, medicines, clothing, dyes, foods of all sorts, and especially the systems that we employ to produce products, -energy, transportation, storage, marketing, and our waste and disposal systems all come wrapped up in a toxic load that bodies absorb.
The air we breathe, the food that we eat, the waters that we drink, the land that we live on, and the buildings that we live and work in are virtual fountains of man made toxins. Life as we know it on the planet is facing a wide array of emerging challenges.

Regulatory systems have become feeble, institutionalized foxes guarding the henhouse. Consumer, banking, health, and environmental overseers are a vanishing species, just like the honeybees. 
The assault on these even moderately responsive regulatory institutions continues to be championed by industry mouthpieces. Pundits, public officials, and politicians are often backed up by cash and well-funded “think tanks” and perfunctory talking points. They have vowed not to stop until there are no regulatory rules left in the United States.  Writing in the conservative National Review in late July, Jim Lacey pontificates that bureaucrats that no one voted for, make decisions that no one is holding them accountable for, and that the resultant costs to business exceeds the national debt in the form of hidden taxes.

Regulatory agencies have lost the power and will to protect the public’s greater interest.  Instead they standby as guardian over the industries economic interests. US environmental regulators almost always act on behalf of industry, espousing the “its best for the economy” argument. This is a bitter and often convoluted argument that has its political genesis in the growing economic divide between the haves and the have-nots. 

While it has been argued that unregulated economic development and growth is in the public’s greater interest, it is also argued that unregulated growth is unsustainable.
Why aren’t we having this public discussion?  

The Precautionary Principle
In many countries, regulators act on what is known as the “Precautionary Principle.”  If a product is possibly dangerous, or human health effects are predicted or potential, the product is not given a green light until the danger has been proven to be remediated by the manufacturer. Many pesticides and other chemicals that are in full use in the U.S are banned in other countries.

In the U.S. the regulatory process is exactly the opposite. The manufacturer always offers its own conclusions that the product(s) are safe.

Opponents such as consumer groups and other watchdogs must prove that the product is dangerous. Consumer groups almost always do not have the financial resources to go against a well-funded industry.


Following in a long line of regulatory decisions, in June of this year the EPA approved the use of a new pesticide to treat “nuisance” insects. The active ingredient of the product, Dinotefuran, is a broad based insect killer that has long been linked to CCD.  Industry scientists say the product is safe and industry profiteers say that the product is good for the economy.    Growing scientific evidence, outside of industry science, is showing that this toxic is a problem for honeybees. Despite that potential economic impact on food production, it now legally used in at least 7 northeast states. Add this to a long list of killer pesticides, miticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other toxins approved by the EPA and used by agriculture that industry and regulators want you to oxymoronically consider “safe”.

The decline of this accountability in the name of profits and economic growth is continuous and almost off the radar of most people. However, man made toxins literally saturate our human habitat.

Our culture has become the enabler that allows the gaming of the system, and the proliferation of poisoned products. How do you argue that unlimited economic growth based on unregulated profit is the best course for humanities future considering the abuses? How do you say that to the one in three children born today with life long disease associated with man made and profitable chemicals? How do you tell that to your mother or sister with breast cancer? How do you tell that to your father or grandfather with prostate cancer? 


Part II

Toxic Invasion
Humans are exposed to human created toxins from just about everywhere. The air we breath, the land we live on, the buildings we live in and the products we purchase are sources of the poisons that are changing our bodies, our health, and our future. Most of these poisons made for profit come from little studied exposure routes and enjoy a complicated and dense web of legal protections.

Unfortunately the list of how we are contaminated is an endless list. Virtually everything that we touch, wear, eat, drink, breathe, are contaminated and are releasing toxics made by humans.  According to the book Poisoned for Profit, the blood of newborns in America contains traces of nearly 300 synthetic chemicals. Milk from virtually every mother on the planet contains high levels of dozens of chemical pollutants. Other researchers have estimated that each human on the planet may contain traces of at least 700 human made toxins.  We are just discovering that the interaction between these chemicals may be the basis for the vanishing of the bees. Are these toxics combining in our bodies to harm us?
Here are some of the sources of man made chemicals that humans are exposed to.

Food- Virtually every bit of food that we eat is infiltrated by pesticides, preservatives, flavor-enhancers, dyes, antibiotics, pharmaceuticals, hormones, artificial vitamins, other medicines, and other man made toxins.  Recently the FDA confirmed that 80 percent of all antibiotics used in the U.S. go to animal agriculture.  We consume this. For years scientists have warned that an overuse of antibiotics is creating superbugs that make us sick even unto death. These superbugs are getting harder to treat.

Fruits and vegetables, fresh, canned, packaged, or otherwise brought to you are full of chemicals from the growth cycle, the distribution cycle, and the display and preservation cycles. The Pesticide Action Network (PAN) has a website with a searchable database “What’s on my Food” that goes into this in excruciating detail.


The site reveals that 888 million lbs. of pesticides are applied in the US each year. That average out to 3lbs per person and that an average American child gets 5 servings of pesticides in their food and water each day. Check out the website, and check out what you eat and what it has in it.

According to PAN, detectable pesticides and residue are found on and in much of our organic harvest. These chemicals arrive by air, dust, water, and cross-pollination from nearby GMO’s (Genetically Modified Organisms). Some organics are better than others but the mass produced organic fruits and vegetables that we buy in the big supermarket are additionally contaminated by water source contaminants, preservation processes, storage and distribution infrastructure, and packaging. Various cooking processes create toxic combinations involving cookware, heat sources, and various room contaminants. Non-organic food including meats and other packaged and canned goods are exposed to or infused with a wide variety of toxins.  This includes all of the above and antibiotics, preservatives, hormones, and a wide array of other toxins.  When we eat them, they become us.

A recent study published by the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry finds that a single glass of milk, including organic milk, contains 200 or more man-made chemicals. These include medicinal residues such as painkillers, anti-inflammatory drugs, lipid regulators, anti-elliptics, beta-blockers, antibiotics, hormones and perceptible quantities of herbicides, pesticides, dioxins, and other substances including radioactive materials.  These are all linked to cancer. One powerful growth hormone called Insulin-like Growth Factor One (IGF-1) is considered a fuel cell for any cancer. IGF-1 is particularly linked to breast, prostate, and colon cancers.

In addition, our food system is exposed to or helps release toxics throughout the life cycle of the product. Transporting, storing, handling, and disposing of food and packaging, releases other contamination into the environment. These toxins find their way into our blood and bodies.

Late last year Wikileaks released diplomatic cables from the Bush administration era revealing that the US Government drew up ways to economically retaliate against European nations precautionary measures that ban Monsanto GMO crops.

Much of the world has decided that the dangers of GMO’s are consequential. The US business/regulatory model pays little attention to the precautionary principle found in Europe but rather promotes economic growth by punishing dissent. For us it is buy and maybe die.  Buy first. Worry Later.

Water- Virtually all drinking water on the planet is at risk or is presently contaminated due to human made toxics. Today a bill has passed through the republican controlled US House with the Orwellian title the “Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011.” This bill promises to eliminate all federal oversight regarding the Clean Water Act, one of America’s landmark environmental laws. Under this new Bill, states could be the decision makers and could allow “in the interests of business and cost benefits”, contamination that we have not seen since the early 1970’s.

Water is contaminated in many ways including industry, agriculture, urban sewers and runoff, rural sewers and runoff, airborne pollutants (including particulate matter from power plants) and numerous other point sources and non point sources. Groundwater from wells, bottled water, or water from public drinking sources, is not necessarily clean or safe. The risks are growing.

The New York Times published an article last year “Millions in U.S. Drink Contaminated Water” which said that 20 percent of the nations water treatments systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act in the last 5 years. It says that while regulators are informed, more than 49 million people have been exposed to illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic, agricultural chemicals, radioactive substances, and bacteria from sewerage. It is one thing to know about this. It is quite another to be able to do anything about it.

According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), America’s drinking water is contaminated by at least 300 known toxins. While this group lists the Buffalo water supply as the 15th safest big city supply in the US, Buffalo’s water was implicated in a portion of the study that suggested that the city’s drinking water had unacceptable levels of hexavalent chromium, also known as the contaminant that made Erin Brochovich famous. In this part of the study, Buffalo’s water ranked 25th most contaminated out of 31 cities tested.

Contamination from hydraulic fracturing is a frightening and new threat. Governor Cuomo and the New York Department of Conservation have declared that hydrofracking can go on in NYS (except for certain watersheds). Oil and gas drilling processes use up to 700 proprietary (secret) ingredients in water injected into the ground to create fractures for gas release. These secret ingredients include known carcinogens and heavy metals including pesticides, bacteriacides, lubricants, and radiation. It was recently revealed that the City of Buffalo Sewer Authority Treatment facility has permitted dumping of fracking fluids into Lake Erie without knowing exactly what they contain. We know they contain the above listed ingredients, but we do not know the exact proprietary formulations. And we will not. New York State has declared that proprietary formulas can remain secret.

WNY is located on the Great Lakes, which contain about 84% of North America’s fresh surface water and 21% of all of the fresh water resource found on earth. The Great Lakes are surrounded by vast agricultural operations and huge urban/industrial areas. Surface runoff, sewers, and air deposition contaminate the Great Lakes waters and watersheds. Groundwater-pumped from underground aquifers is contaminated by surface agricultural practices, runoff from urban areas, winter treated roadways, oil and gas extraction techniques, landfills, sewer systems and multiple other sources.

We are also becoming increasingly aware that growing numbers of pharmaceuticals and drugs are contaminating our drinking water. Medicines and drugs of all types including anti-depressants, estrogen, anxiety medications, antibiotics, and heart medicines are produced and consumed in increasing numbers each year. According to a report released by the Alliance for the Great Lakes, by 2006 over 3.4 billion prescriptions were written in that year representing a 60% increase since 1990. These numbers have only increased since 2006. Drugs enter our drinking water when people either excrete them or dispose of them by flushing them down the drain.  Water treatment plants are not designed to remove these types of contaminants. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not require water utilities to test for these chemicals. The federal government has not set safety limits for drugs in drinking water.
A recent DEA effort to ask citizens to turn in their unused drugs was largely reported as an effort to control illegal street use of the drugs. But the DEA also indicated that one purpose of the event was to eliminate inappropriate disposal of unused drugs by flushing them down the toilet, which is a disposal strategy encouraged by many pharmaceutical companies and other drug dealers wishing to hide the evidence.

Household Products-If you wash food and dishes with soap and water, it could contain a variety of substances including antibacterial chemicals like triclosan, a pesticide. Triclosan is found in hundreds of consumer products including some soaps, lotions, toothpastes, children’s toys, and clothing. Triclosan is a known endocrine disrupter that blocks or mimics hormone functions in the human body.  According to the group “Beyond Pesticides” triclosan was revealed by an Associated Press investigation in 2008 to be one of the most detected chemicals in U.S. waterways.  96% of triclosan from consumer products is disposed of in residential drains. This chemical is not completely removed in wastewater treatment. When the wastewater is released to the environment, some of the triclosan is converted into chloroform and various forms of dioxins.

Cosmetics, Shampoos, sunscreens -There are a reported 12,000 plus ingredients used in cosmetics. Many of these ingredients have been linked to health issues. In a little over 70 years the FDA has decided to ban just 12. Like other toxics from the manufacturing sector, the cosmetic industry polices itself. Most ingredients are not listed, and often, the old story, the focus is shifted to proprietary formulas. Yet we know that many shampoos and body washes contain sodium laureth sulfate which has a byproduct, 1,4 dioxane, a known carcinogen that is suspected to also cause kidney, nerve and respiratory problems. Many personal care products also contain formaldehyde, which is not regulated in the U.S.  According to the National Cancer Institute, formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen. According to Annie Leonard, producer of “The Story of Cosmetics”, both of these substances have been found in dozens of brands including Johnson’s Baby Shampoo and Sesame Street Bubble Bath. Leonard also says that many lipsticks contain lead, and it is found in some of the top selling brand names including L’Oreal, Maybelline, and CoverGirl. Leonard says that lead, a known neurotoxin, has been found in every brand of kid’s face paints tested. Many sunscreens have the same hidden dangers. Over half contain oxybenzone, suspected as a hormone disrupter. This toxin readily penetrates the skin and has been found in the bodies of 97% of those tested by the Centers for Disease Control.

Bisphenol A (BPA)- A new study released by the Canadian Medical Association Journal has found that Americans have twice the amount of BPA in their bodies than do Canadians. The author of the study, Laura Vandenberg thinks that it is because Canada has stronger anti-BPA regulations than the USA. The study also found that infants and adolescents have higher levels in their bodies than do adults. BPA is a man made poison found in many plastics and resins including toys, baby bottles, water bottles, shower curtains, metal food cans, clothing and a wide variety of other products. It is also a hormone disrupting, cancer causing, synthetic estrogen. It has been linked to heart disease and breast cancer.
Last summer a study by the Environmental Working Group revealed that it is found at high levels in cash register and ATM receipts.  About 40% of the receipts from gas stations, banks, convenience stores and the post office contained dangerous amounts of the poison. According to the report the chemical leeches from the paper and transfers to the hands, skin, food, and mouth. It can also be directly absorbed through the skin. It can penetrate so far into the skin that it cannot be washed off. In 2010 Canada banned products that contain BPA as have several other countries. But not the USA. California recently rejected a ban after an aggressive industry sponsored campaign against the prohibition.

Polyvinyl Chloride or PVC -is the material that many building and consumer products are made from. PVC is a poison plastic. It is classified as a known human carcinogen by the EPA. It is dangerous throughout its life cycle.  PVC releases phthalates, which you can smell. Its that new car smell. Phthalates are endocrine disrupters. PVC releases dioxins which are among the most dangerous human made substances on earth. PVC can be found in everything from children’s toys, household products and furnishings, automobiles, and of course, building products including siding, fences, rails, doors, and windows. And these toxins enter our bodies when we come in contact with them or when we breathe the air that they are released into. Recently the City of Buffalo has been discussing testing air for toxic particles released during recent industrial fires. The WNY Clean Air Coalition and Erin Heaney have been doing great work revealing that unsafe levels of chemicals such as Benzene were found in the air affecting residents and firefighters. PVC is now commonly used in home construction and repair as siding, fencing, roofing, flooring, windows, you name it. When PVC burns it releases both hydrochloric acid and dioxin. If someone in your family is a first responder, we hope that they are aware of this.

Lawn and Garden Products
Monsanto’s over the counter Round-Up and Rodeo are widely used by homeowners and gardeners in urban and rural areas. Glyphosate is the active ingredient. This is an herbicide or plant killer. For years Monsanto has told us that Round-up, if “used correctly”, is perfectly safe. According to the ChemicalWatch Factsheet produced by Beyond Pesticides, Glyphosate is linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other acute human health effects. A report delivered before the European Parliament in Brussels last year by researchers from Brazil, the UK and the USA articulates links to low level exposure of Glyphosate with birth defects. Recent studies confirming these effects are upping the pressure on this common herbicide, but its use is growing.

Using it “correctly” is an oxymoron.  It suggests minimum use and low exposures. Minimum use does not serve Monsanto’s bottom line well. These two products are widely used in agriculture and are incorporated into many GMO (genetically modified organisms) seed crops. Most if not all GMO seed crops have been developed to be resistant to chemicals such as Glyphosate. This has lead to an expanded use of Round-up and other chemicals. According to the GMO Journal which advocates for science based sustainable agriculture and safe food practices, research indicates that since GMOs were introduced about a decade ago, agriculture “has applied 318 million more pounds of pesticides than compared to the amount of pesticide likely to have been applied in the absence of GMO seeds. Increased applications have lead to the creation of “superweeds”. These pest weeds are evolving as resistant to Glyphosate and the other toxins.

Increased use means more exposure to workers, consumers, innocent children, and the environment.  We are exposed to this poison in our homes and yards, and in our foods.
These toxic substances are just the tip of the iceberg regarding what we find in our products, our buildings, and in our bloodstreams.

Industrial Agriculture
Agricultural practices have changed dramatically in the last 10 years. Our farmland is changing. Our small diversified and sustainable farms are disappearing. Some are holding on and the locovore movements are helpful. But these operations are threatened by an industry and a culture that increasingly involves industrial operations reliant on heavier lodes of chemicals and poisons.  Part of this is because we have a philosophy that more is better and as a result quality takes a back seat. There is starvation on this planet, but we can do better to provide nutrition and support health.

Our entire food supply has become dependent on factory farming methods that are not environmentally friendly. Chemical fertilizers, herbicides, miticides and a wide variety of other applications and practices are commonplace on almost every farm and food operation on the planet.  It is hard to isolate a tract of land and guarantee that the food products thus created are uncontaminated.  It will become more difficult to confirm organics as time goes on. The distribution, marketing, preservation, and packaging cycles introduce more toxics into the food and into the environment. Modern farming technology is even abandoning soil and instead moving toward more chemically fixated or even sterile growing media as a method of combating the pests that take advantage of the standard practices of industrial monocultures.

It’s the Economy, Stupid!
Politics continues to play the biggest role in saturating the earth with man made toxic chemicals. In the current frenetic atmosphere of American politics it is sometimes difficult to see any hope through the myopic lens of anti environmental, anti regulatory and anti social behavior that is being exhibited by our leadership.

The political philosophy and choices involving big profit and the endlessly expanding global economic plan has no room for precautionary principles or accountability other than the accountability of profit. The well being of society is currently a free market driven concept that is controlled by a hidden hand that is mostly concerned with building consumers and not educating us about the downsides.  And of course in our new American atmosphere big money controls most of the messaging.

Our culture is highly dependent on an economic system that is focused almost exclusively on growth. Global growth promotes market exploitation based on philosophical/political decisions and value judgments.  The growth argument goes that the future depends on this sacrosanct value. This strategy promotes expanded energy markets and production, and the manufacture and sales of more mostly cheap, disposable, and toxic stuff. Much of this is manufactured in places other than the United States and consumed by growing populations worldwide that want more stuff.  More natural resources are commoditized and used up as consumer markets are exploited.  It does not necessarily reflect concerns for human well-being and health. Products from cars to computers are designed with planned obsolescence.  It keeps the pressure on consumers to purchase more and more. Credit schemes and dissembling free market arguments are being dropped like atomic bombs on people and governing structures across the globe. This is done in the context of a growing inequality between the rich and poor. Polarizing social economic arguments plague our political campaigns and our media. It is getting worse. Most Americans don’t even understand fundamental climate change issues, never mind care about them. What are our strategies to deal with the external costs and the burdens of vanishing bees, vanishing biodiversity, an unhealthy environment, and sick humans?  Has our system failed us?

There are no nuances here. People are desperate. They prefer to refer to the vested interests that have created our poisoned planet as the “job makers”. The exploitation is made invisible by deeply ingrained economic fears. Economic development is so vested in consumerism and consumerism is so vested in toxics that it is almost impossible to see a way out.

Critical thinking and resulting dissent have become vanishing skill sets. Media makes it simple by not going into details other than talking points created by the vested interests. Mostly these talking points are repeated over and over until they become truths in our disintegrating mindsets. Our society grows dumber, fatter, and sicker and more vulnerable.

Do we have to defer to the privatizers, the downsizers, and the deregulators?  Accountability other than to profit is vanished with the bees. We are not protected from the poison for profit predators that are taking our lives and have compromised our future. Shouldn’t this be a fundamental issue of national security?

Why not a critical discussion on “limits” to growth. Isn’t it possible that the growth meme is not sustainable? Free market fundamentalists unequivocally say no. Sustainability theorists link economy with ethics and society and believe that the real bottom line is the environment. This suggests that as we operate within our economic policies, there are absolute limits to growth. These are conflicting social and scientific values that we in 2011 are failing to address. Can we discuss this?

In WNY we can find hope. Citizen movements promoting local economy, local food, fair housing, neighborhood infrastructure such as parks and gardens, and local development such as the faster quicker cheaper movement to take over the development of the waterfront, and to generally speak out and up for a better future offers a lot of hope. Now we must build on this and find ways to advocate for better control of poisons that are made for profit.  Supporting the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 is a good start.  Drop a line to your elected officials, local and national and let them know that you expect them to vote for this.