Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Global Warming’ Category

When it rains it poursAccording to an article in Scientific America by Climate Central on May 27, 2014, very heavy rainfalls now happen more often across most of the country, delivering a deluge in place of what would have been routine heavy rain.

Below is a reprint of the research report by Climate Central

Record-breaking rain across Texas and Oklahoma this week caused widespread flooding, the likes of which the region has rarely, if ever, seen. For seven locations there, May 2015 has seen the most rain of any month ever recorded, with five days to go and the rain still coming. While rainfall in the region is consistent with the emerging El Niño, the unprecedented amounts suggest a possible climate change signal, where a warming atmosphere becomes more saturated with water vapor and capable of previously unimagined downpours.

Several people have been killed and hundreds have been rescued from their homes. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has already declared disaster areas in 37 counties. These torrential downpours follow weeks of unusually rainy weather across the Southern Plains. And they stack up to a broader trend in the region, and across the U.S., toward more heavy precipitation.

Across most of the country, the heaviest downpours are happening more frequently, delivering a deluge in place of what would have been routine heavy rain. Climate Central’s new analysis of 65 years of rainfall records at thousands of stations nationwide found that 40 of the lower 48 states have seen an overall increase in heavy downpours since 1950. The biggest increases are in the Northeast and Midwest, which in the past decade, have seen 31 and 16 percent more heavy downpours compared to the 1950s.

Explore these trends in heavy downpours in your state or town, and some of their impacts in our new interactive above.

These intense bouts of rain can wreak havoc on communities. They cause flooding, close schools, businesses, highways and airports, compromise roads and bridges, trigger sewage overflows, and routinely produce million of dollars in damage and kill people.

In Nashville, for example, a 2010 record downpour dumped 13.6 inches of rain in just 2 days, causing an estimated $2 billion in damage. Eleven people were killed, 11,000 homes and businesses were damaged, and 2,700 businesses suffered closures.

Intense rain in Detroit in August 2014 killed two, caused an estimated $1.1 billion of damage, and affected 118,000 homes and businesses.

Heavy rain events may also pose a potential health risk; one recent study found that about half of all waterborne disease outbreaks in the U.S. (between 1948 and 1994) were linked to days of very heavy rain.

Extreme heavy downpours are consistent with what climate scientists expect in a warming world. With hotter temperatures, more water evaporates off the oceans, and the atmosphere can hold more moisture. Research shows that the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere has already increased.

That means that there is often a lot more water available to come down as rain. Climate scientists have already shown that increasing greenhouse gas concentrations as a consequence of human activity are partially responsible for the average global increase in heavy precipitation.

Our analysis examines the heaviest downpours—the days where total precipitation exceeded the top 1 percent of all rain and snow days—at over 3,000 rain gauges distributed across the country over the period 1950-2014. Although some cities have rain gauges that have been around since the 1860s, by the 1950s, about 90 percent of the current list of 3,000 stations was in existence, giving us a consistent 65-year period of study over the whole U.S.. The vast majority of this heavy precipitation came as rain, although in a few rare instances, major snowfalls also count toward these large events.

Heavy precipitation is highly localized, far more than extreme heat, which typically covers relatively large areas. On a 98°F day in New York City, similar high temperatures are usually also found across the entire metro area. On the other hand, an extreme rainfall event can inundate the Long Island suburbs and leave the city itself relatively unscathed.

This makes heavy rainfall trends difficult to measure, because rain gauges are not always located where extreme rains occur. Moreover, local heavy precipitation trends may not accurately reflect changing patterns happening at a larger, regional level. As a consequence, even in regions or states where there is a strong increasing trend in heavy precipitation, the trend at an individual precipitation gauge that represents the official total for a city may be equivocal, flat, or even down.

Our state level analyses of extreme precipitation events shows a strong increasing trend since the 1950s, with 40 of 48 states showing at least some increasing incidence. Consistent with earlier research, six of the top 10 states with the biggest increases in number of days with heavy downpours are in the Northeast, including Rhode Island, Maine, and New Hampshire, which have seen the number of heavy rain events in the last decade increase by at least 50 percent compared to the 1950s.

Our analysis of cities and metro areas, on the other hand, reveals the highly localized and random nature of extreme rain events and the difficulty of detecting these events even with 3,000 rain gauges across the country. In a number of states and regions with clear increasing trends, individual locations show a weak trend or no clear trend at all. This apparent inconsistency says little about the overall trend in the heaviest precipitation events, but a lot about the weaknesses of single-point measurements for detecting trends in extreme precipitation.

An example of this phenomenon is Boston, where the local trend is flat but at the state level, Massachusetts has seen a relatively steady increase in heavy downpours since 1950.

Of course, many individual locations show strong increasing trends in the heaviest precipitation events. The top 50 cities with the strongest increases are:

Climate scientists predict that the recent trends toward more heavy downpours will continue throughout this century. Climate models predict that if carbon emissions continue to increase as they have in recent decades, the types of downpours that used to happen once every 20 years could occur every 4 to 15 years by 2100. As the number of days with extreme precipitation increases, the risk for intense and damaging floods is also expected to increase throughout much of the country.

To see the interactive data on the original Scientific America article, click here.

photo by: Jorge Sanhueza-Lyon/KUT News A flood-damaged house in Wimberley, May 25, 2015.

photo by: Jorge Sanhueza-Lyon/KUT News
A flood-damaged house in Wimberley, May 25, 2015.

This puts Texas leadership at odds on their stated views about climate change and their responsibilities to the  citizens of their state who are reeling from the impacts of flooding throughout the state over the past week.

Texas state climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon, who was appointed by former Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, said in an interview on Wednesday, “We have observed an increase of heavy rain events, at least in the South-Central United States, including Texas, and it’s consistent with what we would expect from climate change.”

That same day, Senator (R-Texas) and Presidential hopeful, Ted Cruz dodged a question on his views on climate change during a press conference, saying, “In a time of tragedy, I think it’s wrong to try to politicize a natural disaster — and so there’s plenty of time to talk about other issues.”

At what point does Texas take action on climate change with a building national and scientific consensus that climate change is real and the government needs to do something about it?

 

Read Full Post »

gas pipeline warning signAccording to Texans for Public Justice (TPJ), the Texas Railroad Commission repeatedly misled the public about its involvement in two controversial gas pipelines. The pipelines will be built across West Texas by Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), which has given almost $225,000 in recent years to the three Railroad Commissioners.

After repeatedly claiming that it had no role in the project, the Railroad Commission quietly approved permits to allow ETP to condemn the land of hundreds of ranchers. Explaining such takings to the commissioners’ xenophobic GOP base could be rough–given that the purpose of the pipelines is to supply gas to Mexico’s state-owned electric company.

Read the report: Eminent-Domain Billionaires Spark West Texas Pipe Lying at TPJ.

Read Full Post »

The United Nations of Confusion - Just how effective are climate pledgesDespite year after year of United Nations talks on climate change, there is still no comprehensive plan. This policy vacuum is leading to an incomplete patchwork of pledges and policies. The United States, Mexico, the European Union, Switzerland, Norway, and Gabon have made climate action pledges. France also continues its ban of cars in attempts to clean the air. However, on the flip side, Japan is giving its money to coal-fired power plants in numerous countries, claiming that it is for “climate finance”.

This raises some questions: How effective are these climate talks and pledges anyway? Are they really helping the global environment? And what happens when countries like Japan move in the opposite direction?

The upsurge of climate activities started when Mexico became the first country to make its climate pledge in 2015, prior to the United Nations climate talks later on this year. The announcement came as a surprise to all, but Mexico started a precedent for other nations. In its pledge, Mexico expressed its plan to decrease its greenhouse emissions by 25% by 2030. Mexico’s plans are ambitious, as the profoundly oil-producing and heavily manufacturing nation wants its greenhouse gas emissions to peak in 2026 and hopes to help establish an international carbon price. Even China, which announced a plan to make emissions cuts back in 2014, and had a year to get ahead, has a goal for its peak year to be 2030. While this is a momentous step in climate change, it will be interesting to see how Mexico commits to the pledge in the upcoming years.

On March 31st, President Barack Obama followed Mexico by pledging to make emission cuts in the United States. The United States has pledged to reduce emissions between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025. This year, the United States joined forces with Mexico, hoping to work together on a variety of climate solutions, including clean electricity.

Environmentalists praised Mexico and the United States for their ambitious plans, but will they lead to decreasing greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will result in the warming of 2 degrees Celsius or less? Having only a few countries commit to limiting emissions will be ineffective – all of the major greenhouse gas contributors will have to participate to stop the most catastrophic warming. Scientific evidence shows that limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius is already impossible, but every bit of warming above that mark puts our planet in worse danger.

Committing is one thing, but action is another. China, Mexico and the U.S.’s climate pledges will only matter if they result in swift and effective action.

It is unclear if there really is a global effort or ability to combat climate change, when there are situations such as the ones in Japan, who has been investing in “climate finance”. What “climate finance” means to the Japanese government is investing in Indonesian coal-fired power plants. Japan’s environmental agenda remains unclear because although it is providing Indonesia money for its coal plants, it states that the money is used to “address the problem of climate change, through measures to either mitigate it (i.e. emit less carbon dioxide from power plants). Japan states that their investment will help developing countries protect themselves from climate change, but there is no guarantee as to what the developing countries actually do with the coal-fired power plants.

Through the different environmental approaches countries worldwide have taken, it is clear that there is not international consensus about the specific details that climate pledges should include and what is considered beneficial to the climate. For example, is “climate finance” a solution? The public may support these climate change pledges, but these promises remain only promises if there is no plan that incorporates all of the major climate change contributors and address the concerns of developing countries that do not have the sufficient funds ore equipment to combat climate change. Combating climate change is a global effort.

Read Full Post »

Killing me softly

Killing me softly

Senate Bill 709, which passed in the Texas Senate on April 16th and has now passed in the Texas House, would scale back the public’s right to participate through a contested-case, an administrative hearing process that allows the public to challenge industrial applications for permits at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) – such as those allowing wastewater discharges or air pollution emissions.

Last night this bill was discussed and passed to third reading in the Texas House.   During the discussion of this bill, it was alleged that “Texas’ current bureaucracy puts the state at a ‘serious disadvantage’ compared to its neighbors,” according to Rep. Geanie Morrison, R-Victoria, who carried the bill in the House.  However, the truth is that there are just not that many permit applications that are affected by the contested case hearing process. In 2014, there were 1,960 applications received by TCEQ. Of those applications, only 10 were referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings – that’s only one half of one percent of applications received in that calendar year. The other 99.5% of permit applications to the TCEQ go uncontested and are processed and issued in time-frames similar to or even faster than our neighboring states with whom we compete most closely for business. This was based on an analysis of public records by Public Citizen and later confirmed by the agency to the Texas Tribune.

This analysis also found that Texas typically processes air quality permits faster than Arkansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Colorado and even Louisiana.  When pressed for one facility Texas might have lost to Louisiana because of a misconception about our permitting process, on the floor of the Texas Senate, Senator Fraser gave the example of Shintech, Inc. (a Japanese subsidiary of Shin Etsu and the largest producer of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) in the United States).  In 1998, Shintech backed out of its plans to build a PVC plant in Convent, LA (which is in the heart of what has become known as “Cancer Alley”, an environmental justice community of low-income, minority residents)  This community fought back and won because of legal opposition by the local residents.  Since that time, Louisiana put rules in place that makes it harder for citizens to obtain legal help to fight off industry – sound familiar?  So now Shintech will be able to expand their operations in Louisiana without much opposition and if they come back here . . . well, they may find the same “business-friendly” fast-track environment.

If this bill is enacted into law, the contested case process that has a track record of improving permits and protecting the environment from the biggest and longest lasting environmentally hazardous projects, would be substantially amended.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

prairie festIn Fort Worth  this weekend

Come by the Public Citizen booth at Prairie Fest

Click here for more information.

Read Full Post »

earthdaytexasCelebrate the Planet | All Day | Three-Day Festival.

April 24-25-26

10AM – 6PM  |  Fair Park  |  Free Admission

Come by the Public Citizen booth (#5404 in Centennial Hall) and say howdy

Click here for more information

Read Full Post »

How Solar Works

How Solar Panels Work

How Solar Panels Work

Check out this NBC News’ 30 seconds to know segment on how solar power works.  Pretty cool.

Renewable energy clears the Air, reduces electric bills, creates jobs, waterproofs our energy supply and kept the lights on during peak times during the drought years when our “baseline” generation was unable to keep up with the demand.

Now check out our earlier post about the move in the Texas legislature to abolish renewable energy programs in the state. The bill that would do that, SB 931, heads to the Texas House of Representatives next.  If you live in Texas, now is the time to call your Representative to voice your opposition to this anti-renewable energy bill.  If you don’t know who represents you, look it up.

 

Read Full Post »

EPAGet the Facts on Consumer Costs and the EPA’s Clean Power Plan

For more information, view the fact sheet (PDF).

Today, the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce is holding a hearing on the legal and cost issues associated with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rule to curb greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants.

The rule, also called the Clean Power Plan, will lower consumer bills, benefit the economy and boost public health, while helping to combat climate change, according to a fact sheet released today by Public Citizen. Electricity bills will be 8.4 percent lower by 2030 and the plan will contribute between $260 billion and $840 billion to the economy over 10 years.

Read Full Post »

texas tribune symposium on waterOn Tuesday, March 10, the Texas Tribune will host a one-day symposium on water in partnership with Texas State University.

 

 

 

Panel topics will include:

  • Life After Proposition 6
  • The Battle Over Groundwater
  • How Much More Can We Conserve?
  • Why Water Along the Border is Undrinkable

And at lunchtime, Tribune CEO and Editor-in-Chief Evan Smith will sit down with Brian McCall, chancellor of the Texas State University System, for a special conversation.

Register Now

Tuesday, March 10, 2015
8 a.m. – 2:45 p.m.

See the full program for panel details.

Texas State University
J.C. Kellam Administration Building
Reed Parr Room (11th Floor)
601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666

This event is free and open to the public, but please register at trib.it/WaterSymposiumInvite so they can save you a seat. Hourly paid parking will be available in the Edward Gary Street Garage.

Can’t make it in person? Tune in to the livestream, and join the dialogue on Twitter with #TTEvents.

Have colleagues or friends who are interested in water issues? Please forward this invitation to them! All are welcome.

This event is generously sponsored by Texas State University, Texas A&M University, the Meadows Center for Water and Environment, SouthWest Water Company, the Texas Farm Bureau and the Meadows Foundation. Tribune events are also supported through contributions from their founding investors and members.

Disclosure: Though donors and corporate sponsors underwrite their events, they play no role in determining the content, panelists or line of questioning.

Read Full Post »

Climate Skeptic Industry Shill, Wei-Hock 'Willie' Soon

Climate change skeptic, Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon, revealed as an industry shill.

A climate change denying scientist working for the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has been accused of taking money from the fossil fuel industry and subsequently publishing research without disclosing his funding sources and potential conflicts of interest. According to documents obtained by Greenpeace through the Freedom of Information Act, Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon received $1.25 million from the Koch brothers, Exxon Mobil, the American Petroleum Institute (API), and Southern Company.

Around the issue of climate change, there is a 97% consensus amongst climate scientists and the research literature that humans are responsible for global warming, mainly through the emission of greenhouse gasses. Soon’s “research” leads him to claim that climate change is caused by the sun [An idea that U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change dismissed in its 2013 report]. Being a climate skeptic, Soon has become very popular in certain political circles. He was praised by Senator James Inhofe, the Republican from Oklahoma who called climate change a hoax. Soon was also called by Republicans in the Kansas state legislature to testify against measures to promote wind and solar power. The Heartland Institute even gave him the “Courage in Defense of Science Award” for his work.

The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics released a statement saying that Soon is “a part-time researcher at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory,” and they are “greatly concerned about the allegations surrounding Dr. Willie Soon’s failure to disclose funding sources for his climate change research.” The institute also added: “Scientific evidence has demonstrated that the global climate is warming as a result of increasing levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases generated by human activities.”

Of the 58 “experts” listed by the Heartland Institute as heroic deniers of climate change, The Daily Beast found that only three out of the 58 have credentials in climatology or atmospheric science. One of these three certified scientists, Patrick Michaels, has already admitted that 40 percent of his funding is from the fossil fuel lobby. Over time, we can expect that more climate change skeptics and “truthers” will be exposed as paid mouthpieces for fossil fuels.

Read Full Post »

China's worsening air pollution has exacted a significant economic toll, grounding flights, closing highways and keeping tourists at home. Photograph from STR/AFP/Getty Images

China’s worsening air pollution has exacted a significant economic toll, grounding flights, closing highways and keeping tourists at home. Photograph from STR/AFP/Getty Images

Back in November 2014, America and China joined hands to fight global climate change, including a plan to decrease China’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Although there has been a lot of doubt about their plan, China has shown results. According to the China Coal Industry Association, China’s coal production decreased by 2.5% last year, marking the first reduction that the country has seen in years.

As the world’s primary emitter of greenhouse gases, the Republic of China’s decision to create new environmental policies allows China to be a global example in leading the way to reduce CO2 emissions. The global negotiations are also receiving praise because of their economic benefits. The solar power market has seen increases since November, further strengthening industrial market growth and enhancing public health.

However, a recent measure of Beijing’s Air Quality Index brings concerns about the toxic air the Chinese are breathing. Despite the country’s efforts to fight pollution, the consequences of being the world’s number one consumer of coal has caused Beijing to experience another airpocalypse just a few weeks ago. The city reached smog-levels that were, literally, off the charts.

A recent Greenpeace study stated that most cities in China are “failing to meet China’s own national standards”, regardless of the country’s initiatives to combat pollution. Additionally, a Peking University and Greenpeace study shows that more than 200 thousand Chinese could die from pollution-related diseases if there is no further caution taken by the Chinese government. The recent “airpocalypse” further raised the concerns of the Chinese government, who are more driven to push the country to continue its initiatives to combat climate change.

The city’s Air Quality Index of over 600 and new Greenpeace studies should stand to be an example to the rest of the world. The high levels of coal consumption, power plants, and fracking that China has experienced in less than a decade has proved to be dangerous. Although the country is taking action now, the effects evidently will linger for a long time. As the United States continues its high consumption of coal, building of power plants, and fracking, it is important to look at China as an example and as a reminder that we need to start taking action before it is too late.

Read Full Post »

Obama Reject Keystone XLThe Keystone XL pipeline would result in the release of 1.3 billion tons of climate destabilizing pollution over its expected lifespan — and that’s even before the oil gets burned overseas.

This information presented in the State Department’s final review of Keystone contributes to the overwhelming evidence against approving the tar sands pipeline.

In fact, President Obama has more than enough information to determine that the Keystone pipeline is not in our national interest.

Tell President Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline once and for all.

1.3 billion tons of carbon emissions.

That’s the equivalent of putting another 120,000 cars on our roads — every year, for 50 years.

We simply cannot afford to spew that much more climate-disrupting pollution into our atmosphere.

Any day, the president could make a decision on whether to allow this disastrous project to go forward.

That’s why we must keep the pressure on: Sign our petition to President Obama urging him to declare that the Keystone XL pipeline is not in our national interest.

Read Full Post »

For over six years, the Keystone XL pipeline has been under a long controversial discussion due to its numerous environmental concerns, including jeopardizing clean water along the pipeline all the way from Canada to Texas. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency has raised even further environmental concerns due to the possible increase of greenhouse gas emissions if the pipeline is built. Plunging oil prices make the alternative of transporting the tar sands oil by rail uneconomical. Building the pipeline would offer a cheaper method of transport and would therefor increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Alberta tar sands operation in 2008 - Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Alberta tar sands operation in 2008. Photo from Wikimedia Commons

EPA Assistant Administrator Cynthia Giles’ letter calls for both the Department of State and President Obama’s attention to the EPA’s review of the proposed $7 billion pipeline. Tar sands have significantly greater total greenhouse gas emissions than other crude oils. The emissions equate to 1.3 to 27.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, which is “equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from 5.7 passenger vehicles or 7.8 coal fired power plants,” according to Giles. “Over a 50-year lifetime of the pipeline, this could translate into releasing as much as 1.37 billion more tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.”

President Obama has continuously promised citizens that the pipeline’s entire potential climate hazards would be considered during his decision-making for Keystone, further supported in his speech back in 2013 regarding climate change.

Despite Obama’s inferred veto, there is still continued support for the Keystone pipeline. Companies like TransCanada, the energy company trying to build the international pipeline, claims that the drop in global oil prices will soon pass and that there has been a decrease in Canada’s gas emissions, but the company’s other claims, particularly about job creation have proved false.

Despite concerns about the project, the Senate has approved the Keystone Bill to start building the pipeline, further dividing the chamber and highlighting the Senators’ different stances on climate and environmental issues. The Obama administration is currently evaluating the nation’s comments along with the EPA’s review. Because Keystone crosses international borders, President Obama holds the ultimate right to either approve or reject the proposal.

Read Full Post »

P2PPosterNew

Film screening of Pay 2 Play: Democracy’s High Stakes.

This documentary follows filmmaker John Ennis’ quest to find a way out from under the Pay 2 Play System, where Politicians reward their donors with even larger sums from the public treasury — through contracts, tax cuts, and deregulation.  Along the way, he journeys through high drama on the Ohio campaign trail, uncovers the secret history of the game Monopoly, and explores the underworld of L.A. street art on a humorous odyssey that reveals how much of a difference one person can make.   This entertaining film is a layman’s guidebook to taking back our democracy.

Date: Wednesday, January 21

Time: beginning at 6:30 PM

Where:  Alamo Drafthouse in the Village Shopping Center at 2700 W. Anderson Lane

Agenda:
6:30-7:00 meet and greet and order dinner
7:00-8:30 show film
8:30-9:30 panel and audience discussion

Panelists Include:
Tom “Smitty” Smith, Public Citizen Texas;
Craig McDonald, Texans for Public Justice;
Sara Smith, TexPIRG;
Todd Jagger, Wolf-PAC; and
Caroline Homer, Move To Amend

Buy Tickets ($10.25)

Read Full Post »

Coalition for Sensible SafeguardsThe Coalition for Sensible Safeguards strongly opposes the Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA), which the House passed on Tuesday. They are urging members of Congress to oppose it and The White House  has issued a veto threat for the Bill . This innocuous-sounding bill is designed to undermine our nation’s environmental, public health, workplace safety and consumer financial security protections – not improve them.

The RAA would rewrite dozens of laws, including the Clean Air Act, the Consumer Product Safety Act and the Food Safety Modernization Act by requiring federal agencies to put corporate profits ahead of the health and safety of American workers and families. Agencies would have to produce highly speculative estimates of all the indirect costs and benefits of proposed rules and do the same for any potential alternatives. What counts and does not count as an indirect cost or a potential alternative? The bill leaves that up to the imagination of industry.

In addition, the RAA would hamstring the work of agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The bill would subject their work to review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is infamous for delaying, diluting and blocking important new safeguards. Federal agencies already take years to issue health and safety standards. The dozens of cumbersome requirements added by this bill would make that process even longer.

Any high-stakes rule that miraculously made it through these roadblocks would face unprecedented challenges. The RAA would allow industry lobbyists to second-guess the work of respected scientists through legal challenges, sparking a wave of litigation that would add even more costs and delays to the rulemaking process – while putting the lives, health and safety of millions of Americans at risk.

The costs of blocking crucial standards and safeguards are clear: The Wall Street economic collapse, the Upper Big Branch mine explosion in West Virginia, the West Fertilizer Company explosion in West, TX, countless food and product safety recalls and massive environmental disasters including the Dan River coal ash spill in North Carolina and the Freedom Industries chemical spill in West Virginia are just some of the most recent examples.

It’s no wonder polling shows that Americans want better enforcement of our nation’s rules and standards. Congress should listen to the public and stop trying to sabotage the safeguards that protect us all.

To learn more about the potential effects of the bill, see the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards’ 2011 report: Impacts of the Regulatory Accountability Act. The latest version of the bill has been partially revised, but the problems at the heart of the bill remain.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »