A Firefighter Speaks Out On the Need for Real Chemical Security

Posted on July 23, 2010 by philipradford

110 million Americans live with the risk of a large-scale chemical disaster, and many of those are the brave citizens who respond when the worst happens. Ed Schlegel is a retired Fire Captain in California who has first-hand experience with responding to a chemical disaster. He was one of the brave citizens who marched into a chemical plant leaking deadly chlorine gas when the employees were running out. He is proud to protect us, but he knows than many chemical plants don’t have to pose this risk.

It’s hard to believe that in a post-9/11 world we are not doing everything we can to reduce terrorist targets. All over the country there are chemical and water treatment facilities that are like sitting ducks, unnecessarily storing large amounts of toxic gasses that put thousands to millions of people at risk of a disaster. As we watch the unfolding tragedy in the Gulf we should realize that hypothetical worst-case scenarios can be frighteningly underestimated when they become a reality.

The Senate Needs To Act

Congress has been wrestling with chemical security standards for over a decade and it is now the Senate’s turn to pass common-sense measures that reduce the risk of a catastrophic release of poison gas. Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey (a state riddled with chemical facilities) introduced a package of legislation last week that would protect millions of Americans. Once again, though, industry is putting profits over disaster prevention by spreading unsubstantiated claims of economic disaster and job loss.

Read the entire blog at Huffington Post

After 11 Weeks of Disaster, Time for Freedom From Oil (PHOTOS)

Posted on July 2, 2010 by philipradford

Eleven weeks ago, BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil platform exploded into the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers. Since the explosion thousands upon thousands of barrels of oil have spewed into this precious ecosystem, hundreds of wildlife have been affected, the fishing industry has been decimated, and an entire culture is being threatened.

Greenpeace scientists and volunteers have been in the Gulf since week one collecting data and exposing the largest environmental disaster of our time. Using our boats, planes and expertise we’ve helped reporters gain access to hard to reach areas and documented the disaster ourselves every step of the way. Here are some of our most powerful photos, along with those of others, to share with you what we’ve seen in the past 11 weeks. On Independence Day this weekend, let us remember that we have yet to achieve energy independence from dirty and harmful fossil fuels.

See the full post and slideshow on the Huffington Post

Play by Play at the G-8 and G-20

Posted on June 26, 2010 by philipradford

Toronto – world leaders are gathering today to discuss several topics, including how to implement their commitment at their last meeting to phase out fossil fuel subsidies worldwide.

9:34, Monday, June 28

My prediction that some countries would show up with nothing (because I may have seen the leaked document with the commitments from different countries) hits the E&E Daily:

NATIONS: Six countries claim no fossil fuel subsidies — leaked G-20 report (06/28/2010)

Lisa Friedman, E&E reporter

President Obama and other world leaders yesterday renewed their commitment to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but sidestepped specifics about how individual countries would do so and when.
Issuing a final declaration as they wrapped up a Group of 20 economic summit in Toronto, leaders again asked finance and energy ministers to come up with strategies for eliminating assistance for oil and gas production and consumption.

5:21, Sunday, June 27

The G20 Ends

Some G20 leaders have taken first steps towards phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but collectively, their actions still don’t address the urgent need to stop catastrophic climate change.

Read the full blog here on the Huffington Post.

Obama Administration Keeps Promise on Whale Conservation at International Talks

Posted on June 25, 2010 by philipradford

You would be hard pressed to find a director of an environmental group who is more critical than yours truly regarding the gap between President Obama’s visionary campaign messages and his actual leadership on environmental issues.

But I must say that I was impressed when I heard the U.S. government’s position against commercial whaling and any trade of whale products at the International Whaling Commission. While the nations that gathered failed to come to an agreement that could help save whales – largely because countries like Japan refuse to stop slaughtering whales – the President and his team stood their ground in the end.

While campaigning for president, Obama promised Greenpeace that under his leadership, the United States would work to strengthen the international moratorium on commercial whaling. He declared that “allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.”

That promise came under question this year when we received confirmation that the President was supporting a proposal that would have lifted the 24-year ban on commercial whaling. In response, 1.5 million people signed petitions urging the White House to stand up for whales and President Obama, to his credit, listened. The US statement at the IWC meeting reaffirmed the government’s support for whale conservation:

"First and foremost, the United States continues to support the commercial whaling moratorium. We strongly oppose lethal scientific whaling – we strongly believe it unnecessary for modern whale conservation and management. In particular, the United States is concerned by whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, and by the increased international trade and black market trade in whale meat and whale products."

This year, the best we could do was keep the IWC from rolling back protections for whales. Next year, the IWC needs to get serious and close the loopholes that have allowed Japan, Iceland, and Norway to flaunt the moratorium and keep slaughtering whales. As I write this, four Japanese whaling ships are currently navigating the Northwestern Pacific, planning to kill 260 whales by the end of August.

For over thirty years, Greenpeace has been the most outspoken opponent of commercial whaling, taking action to stop the harpooners in their home countries, at sea and in the political arena of IWC meetings and our commitment to bringing about its end in all of our oceans remains. Hopefully by this time next year, we’ll be in a position to get the IWC to actually do something positive, instead of having to work like mad just to keep them from moving backwards. Today, the United States stayed true to Obama’s promise to Americans. Today, I feel that hope about the President and our chances to stop whaling that so many felt when President Obama first called on America to share his hope for a better for our children and grandchildren.

New Jersey Chemical Plant Puts 12 Million at Risk, Threatens Most Lives in New York City

Posted on June 22, 2010 by philipradford

Today, Greenpeace announced that our citizens’ inspection of the Kuehne Chemical plant near New York City in South Kearny, NJ showed that the two million pounds of Chlorine gas on site puts up to 12 million people in the New York area at risk. This “worst case scenario,” defined by their Risk Management Plan submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency, would occur from the release of just one full rail car of chlorine gas. There could be enough chlorine gas on site at the Kuehne facility to fill 11 rail cars and the Department of Homeland Security has said that a terrorist attack would likely be worse than a worst-case scenario.

The Threat

Imagine a low-lying cloud of lethal chlorine gas spreading through New York City or your home town, stretching 15 miles past your childhood playground, your place of worship, or your friends’ homes. Imagine that you witness the same horror seen by American troops when Hitler used chlorine gas as a weapon: people gasping for air and grasping their throats as fumes melted their lungs and slowly suffocate them. Imagine that your Senator could have done something to prevent this.

Last November the House of Representatives passed a bill that November that would require high-risk chemical facilities to convert to safer chemicals if feasible. Soon afterward Senator Lautenberg pledged to introduce similar legislation in the Senate. We expect that legislation to come out soon and we need the full Senate to take action this summer. If the U.S. Senate fails to act this year, you could be one in three Americans who will remain at risk.

The terrorist attacks on September 11 shocked us all and set into motion the tightening of our security systems. While we’ve added air puffing machines to our airports, metal detectors, x-ray machines, and requirements to take off our shoes, our elected officials have all but ignored the fact that the nation’s dangerous chemical facilities remain unsecured. There are so many of these facilities, that the Department of Homeland Security can only inspect less than 5% of these plants they themselves have identified as high-risk.

This Risk is Unnecessary

This risk need not exist. This facility, as well as other high-risk facilities around the country, could convert to a safer process. One example is Clorox, the most recognizable name in chlorine products, which has pledged to convert all of its plants over the next few years. Dow Chemical is even converting a facility using “just in time” technology that eliminates large storage of chlorine on site. But even with the 500 or more plants that have converted over the last decade, over 110 million Americans still live within the vulnerability zone of a catastrophic chemical disaster; one-third of our population.

Almost nine years after the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history, our most vulnerable targets remain at risk. Simple, inexpensive, and common sense changes, like substituting or reducing the amount of lethal gases stored on-site, would protect millions of people from harm. As Senator Lieberman said during a hearing earlier this year, safer technologies are “the only fool proof way to defeat a terrorist determined to strike a chemical facility.” In that same hearing Senator Voinovich of Ohio asked, “What’s the need… is there something that’s going to happen that’s catastrophic?” Well, Senator, you sound like your peers who asked me the same questions when lifting the off-shore oil ban.

We need our Senators to support Senator Lautenberg’s bill and stand up to industry lobbyists, take action by sending a message to you Senator.

President Obama: Give us our future back

Posted on June 15, 2010 by philipradford

President Obama’s Oval Office speech tonight could be a turning point of historical significance for his legacy, America’s security, and the world that we leave our children. Will President Obama give a grandiose speech followed by more politically expedient baby-steps, or will he set America on a new path?

Greenpeace BP Deepwater Disaster picture

View more images of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Tonight, the President owes America the unflinching, spin-free truth: The only way to avoid more fossil fuel disasters is to move aggressively away from dangerous energy sources like oil and coal. We have all seen the devastating pictures from the Gulf: ruined beaches, oil-slicked birds, dead and dying marine life. I have witnessed it first hand. It is a mess we can’t clean up. No matter what you hear, the best-case scenario is that we clean up 5-10% of the oil.

This is a turning point of immense historical significance. If we miss the turn, we miss the chance to grab our future with both hands. For President Obama to show the leadership that people dreamed he would when sweeping him into office, he needs to declare a new Apollo program, the moon mission that invests in energy efficiency, clean energy, electric cars, public transportation, geothermal energy and safe biofuels that will help kick our oil addiction by 2030. President Obama must stand in the Oval Office tonight and turn away from apologies, excuses, and finger pointing to seize this moment for America’s future.

Read more on Huffington Post

Thoughts on Whose Ass Obama Should Kick

Posted on June 10, 2010 by philipradford

President Obama asked yesterday "whose ass to kick" over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. I have a few ideas.

1. Tony Hayward. BP CEO Tony Hayward and his company should be criminally charged for the reckless endangerment of their workers, for violations of the Clean Water Act by dumping millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf, and for stealing the income of the people who rely on the Gulf for their livelihoods. Instead, seven of my colleagues are being aggressively charged with felonies for peacefully calling on the President to stop offshore Arctic drilling. Arrest the real criminals.

2. Lisa Murkowski. Senator Lisa Murkowski is just one of many of our elected officials who seem to be working for the fossil fuel industries instead of in the interest of the American people. As the Gulf Region watches in horror at the impacts of the oil spill on its coasts, its waters, and its economy, the US Senate is scheduled to consider a proposal tomorrow from Senator Lisa Murkowski that would protect oil companies and other big polluters by gutting America’s Clean Air Act.

3. His Own and His Staffs’. Obama and his top staff must take responsibility for their distinct lack of vision in a time of oil, national security, and climate crises, clinging to weak Senate climate legislation instead of pivoting towards a vision of getting the U.S. off of oil by 2030. A smart first step would be to call for all cars to be plug-in electrics by 2030.

The Energy [R]evolution

To eliminate the risks of another BP Deepwater Disaster, we must look away from the dinosaur fossil fuel companies of our past and towards a bright future of clean, renewable energy. It is possible right now to make the changes we need for that future. Don’t believe those who tell you that it’s too hard or too expensive.

[BP]resident Obama – Where does BP begin and Obama end?

Posted on May 24, 2010 by philipradford

The sticky, hot oil was so deep that my boots sank three inches and nearly came off when I took my next step.

Where the beach looked clean, I let my eyes follow baby crabs a foot more on shore where I saw the wall of debris and grass saturated four inches deep with thick, reddish-brown oil.

Last Thursday marked one month since the Deepwater Horizon exploded, killing 11 people and setting in motion an unfolding, unprecedented disaster in the U.S.

[BP]resident Obama?

What was so unsettling in the Gulf was that when I was down there I couldn’t tell where President Obama began and BP ended. Greenpeace boats full of reporters were physically blocked by the coastguard and forbidden to take pictures of the oil on the beach. When asked why, the coast guard staff replied: “It’s not our policy. It’s BP’s policy.” The President’s response to the spill, until yesterday when Lisa Jackson demanded that the toxic dispersants be replaced (kudos to her for this), has seemed like a page out of BP’s playbook of focusing on image damage control as much as oil spill damage control. He has not batted an eye in defending further off-shore oil drilling and has withheld from the publicthe scale of the problem.

I was heartened to hear that the President called for truck mile per gallon standards be upgraded and that fuel economy standards should be strengthened in the long-run for regular cars. The big question is if the President will virtually phase out the use of oil in cars by 2030 or continue down Ken Salazar’s misguided drill baby drill policy.

The Coast Guard’s “Nightmare Scenario”

As leviathans of underwater oil move their way up the East Coast, President Obama is opening the door to what the Coast Guard called its “nightmare scenario” – drilling in the Arctic.

Shell Oil plans to begin exploratory drilling in Alaska’s Arctic Ocean this July. According to the Coast Guard, the pristine Chukchi and Beaufort Seas are extremely remote, freezing cold, covered in darkness for much of the year, and the water is incredibly choppy, making a spill a “nightmare.” The rig being shipped right now to the Arctic is older than the BP Deepwater rig that exploded. Regardless, President Obama and Secretary of Interior Salazar continue to push the interests of big oil companies.

This moment will require that the President do more than say that he is frustrated with BP and (rightly) pointing the finger. President Obama should ban all offshore oil drilling and call for an end to the use of oil in our cars by 2030.

Stopping Shell’s drilling plan would be a good, first indicator that the President is moving away from the Salazar-BP oil policy. Getting America’s cars and trucks off of oil by 2030 would prove that the President is finally actually leading.

Today Greenpeace activists took a stand on the ship the Harvey Explorer to send a message to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. The activists used oil from the spill to paint the message “Arctic Next?” on the bridge of the ship, which is scheduled to depart for Alaska to support drilling operations in July.

Nestle to save orangutans, tropical forests, and our climate

Posted on May 18, 2010 by philipradford

Finally… some good news! Nestle, the world’s biggest food and drinks company, announced that it will cease using products that drive the tropical rainforest destruction.

This is great news for our environment in what has otherwise been a bleak few weeks. President Obama continues to dig in (or drill in) and stand firm behind his plans to increase offshore oil drilling despite the BP Deepwater oil disaster and continues to work to lift the ban on commercial whaling.

In the midst of it all, Nestle’s recent act is a refreshing act of leadership.

Here is why this matters: 17 percent of global-warming pollution comes from deforestation. Brazil and Indonesia are among the four most polluting countries (with China and the U.S.) because cutting trees releases carbon pollution.

To address the main driver of deforestation in Brazil — cattle ranching — Greenpeace worked with Nike, Wal-Mart, Timberland, and other companies to pressure their suppliers to stop grazing cattle on recently deforested land.

In Indonesia, palm oil and pulp plantations are both driving deforestation and pushing orangutans to the brink of extinction. After being caught red-handed, Nestle has committed to identify and exclude companies from its supply chain that own or manage "high-risk plantations or farms linked to deforestation." This exclusion would apply to companies such as Sinar Mas, Indonesia’s most notorious palm-oil and pulp-and-paper supplier, if it fails to meet the criteria set out in the policy. It also has implications for palm oil traders, such as Cargill, which continue to buy from Sinar Mas.

Read more at Grist.com >>

BP Waives Responsibility Health Effects of Oil Clean up could be Deadly

Posted on May 13, 2010 by philipradford

After the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, employees and volunteers working around the oil became seriously ill and many of the thousands of workers died from inhaling the toxic air and handling dispersants that contained benzene and other chemicals.

Those same chemicals are currently being used on the BP Deepwater Oil Disaster.

In the Gulf the people at risk of illness are the thousands of Louisiana fisherman rendered jobless by BP’s oil spill. These fishermen have been left with no other option than to work for the same company that has taken away their livelihoods.

In BP’s most recent move to avoid responsibility, the company is requiring these men and women to sign the waiver below. The waiver protects BP from being sued by their staff and volunteers for “claims and damages in connection with use of equipment connected with the Response Activities.”

In other words, BP has prioritized protecting its corporate interests and pocketbook over providing medical care for injuries and illnesses stemming from those workers and families cleaning up the BP mess.

This is BP’s second attempt to dodge responsibility and limit their liability. A previous BP agreement, that gave residents $5,000 in exchange for waiving their right to sue, was already struck down by Louisiana courts.

BP Waiver