Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Former House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, collapsed in the Capitol this morning while laying out a bill before the House Transportation Committee. His office sent out a statement saying EMS does not consider the situation serious.  For updates, we suggest checking the Texas Tribune.

After residents report green and yellow-colored well water near an oilfield company’s operation in the spring of 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigated and formally designated an area in Midland as a national Superfund site when the presence of the highly toxic solvent hexavalent chromium was found in groundwater supplies.  The Superfund list is made up of sites so contaminated that they require long-term, complex and expensive cleanups.

These reports from residents led to testing that found that 46 of the more than 230 wells in the area had levels of the toxin in them that were above safety limits. Filtration systems have been provided to the owners of the contaminated wells.

Breathing airborne hexavalent chromium may cause lung cancer, can irritate or damage the nose, throat and lungs, and can also damage eyes or skin. Exposure to hexavalent chromium in drinking water can lead to an increased risk of stomach tumors.

While Texas has been at war with the EPA over the last couple of years, cleaning up sites that pose such a major threat to public health is one of the most vital aspects of the agency’s mission, and I for one, would not like to see the agency hobbled so that they can no longer protect communities from dangers posed by chemical contamination.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality first confirmed hexavalent chromium at more than 50 times the acceptable federal levels in early April 2009 in a well near West County Road 112.

Since then, 234 water wells have been tested by the TCEQ; chromium was found at above safe levels in 34 of them. The plume extends 1.25 miles from the center of the site and it covers about 260 acres, according to the EPA.

UPDATE:

Using the EPA document's description, this is about where the superfund site is centered

According to an EPA document, the Site consists of a contaminated ground water plume originating from an unidentified source. The contaminant plume is located along County Road 1290, between Interstate 20 to the south, and Interstate Business 20 to the north. The Trinity and Ogallala aquifer is the only ground water source for drinking water in the site area. The water table has been reported at depths as shallow as 30 feet below the ground surface and the base of the aquifer is approximately 95 – 105 feet below ground surface. The Triassic red beds form the base of the aquifer. Ground water flow in the aquifer is expected to be generally to the south-southeast.

As part of the National Priorities List, the EPA will take the lead at the site and federal funds will be available for identifying the source of contamination and providing a method of cleanup.

Until a source of contamination is identified, EPA officials said in a release sent out Tuesday that the plume of contamination will continue to grow and affect additional water wells.

City of Midland officials have said, at this time, the city is unable to provide water to residents in that area. A group is working to put together a water district that would serve county residents, including those in the contaminated area, but a source of water has yet to be identified.

If a water source were available, EPA staff have said they could consider funding pipelines as part of the remediation process.

Related Articles

LCRA’s Fayette Power Project is under legal attack by three anti-pollution groups who filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the coal-fired power plant located near La Grange, about 100 miles northwest of Houston.

The lawsuit was filed by the Environmental Integrity Project, Environment Texas and Texas Campaign for the Environment.

Claiming LCRA’s Fayette Power Project has violated the federal Clean Air Act thousands of times, the plaintiffs allege LCRA ramped up capacity and increased levels of dangerous particle pollution, which is not always visible to the eye but is linked to asthma and heart and lung disease.

In addition, the groups claim the company under-reported the amount of particulate matter emitted from the plant’s smokestacks, and therefore deprived the State of Texas of more than $500,000 in annual air pollution fees.  Click here to access details of the lawsuit.

In addition to the lawsuit, the Texas Pecan Alliance, Sierra Club, Public Citizen, and other community and environmental groups have been calling on Austin City Council to commit to the promises of clean energy in line with the Austin Energy Generation plan and have asked for the closure of this plant.

Texas Barnett Shale gas drilling rig

Texas Barnett Shale gas drilling rig -Wikipedia

According to hearing examiners for the Texas Railroad Commission, Range Resources was not responsible for contaminating two residential drinking water wells in Parker County.

The Fort Worth company was accused by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in December of allowing methane and other substances from its Barnett Shale hydraulic fracking operations into the wells.  But the hearing examiners findings are saying that the more likely sources of the contamination was the much shallower Strawn geological formation, which also contains natural gas deposits.

The full Railroad Commission will act on the hearing examiners’ findings at its March 22 public hearing.  If you would like to watch the hearing click here to access the streaming video live, or watched the archived video a few days later.

Public concern has been high and it is unknown yet, how the citizens of Parker, Hood and surrounding counties are responding to these findings.

To see the hearing examiners’ findings and supporting material, click here.

Are desperate school boards having to make decisions about the fiscal health of their districts now vs the long-term health of their charges in the future?

Mike Norman, the editorial director of the Star-Telegram/Arlington and Northeast Tarrant County, writes about the precarious lab rat position of citizens in the Barnett Shale.  Click here to read his editorial.

Senator Florence Shapiro (R-Plano)

A bill filed by Senator Florence Shapiro (R-Plano) – SB 468 – purports to promote “flexibility of the board of trustees of a school district in the management and operation of public schools in the district,” and makes several changes to the law, including class sizes and the repeal of Section 1951.212 of the Occupations Code, the section of state law entitled “Integrated Pest Management Programs for School Districts”.

In 1993, Texas became one of the first states to require schools to use the least toxic methods to control pests. Children are especially vulnerable to pesticide exposure as they take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults and have developing organ systems that are less able to detoxify toxic chemicals.

According to the group Beyond Pesticides, of the 40 most commonly used pesticides in schools, “28 can cause cancer, 14 are linked to endocrine disruption, 26 can adversely affect reproduction, 26 are nervous system poisons and 13 can cause birth defects.” Texas has been a leader in this area and is one of fifteen states to require least toxic methods (known as “integrated pest management”) at schools to protect our children from exposure to these chemicals.

It’s unclear what the motivation is behind this repeal. In a 2005 Texas AgriLife Extension survey of over 500 Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Coordinators, “53% felt that the IPM requirements had actually reduced long-term costs of pest management. Fifteen percent believed there was no change in cost to the district. Only 18% of districts said that they felt the school IPM regulations had increased the long-term costs of pest control to their district.” Furthermore, “schools were 75% more likely to be satisfied with their pest control program compared to 1993, before the law went into effect. In addition, the study found that 75% of school IPM coordinators believe that the state IPM requirements have resulted in more effective pest management in their districts.”

To read a copy of this bill, click here.  To read the section of the code this bill repeals, click here.  

This bill is expected to be heard in the Senate Education Committee tomorrow.  If you are concerned, please contact committee members to let them know of your concerns. 

Senate Education Committee

Got Solar?

Senator John Carona (R-Dallas)

Senator John Carona (R-Dallas)

For many who want to add more rooftop and other on-site solar generating devices on homes and even commercial properties, there have been concerns about the prospect of being regulated as utilities.  This concern has been seen as an overly burdensome barrier to the industry, however Senator John Carona (R-Dallas) filed legislation that would make clear that retail electric customers who install generation devices such as solar panels on their property are not regulated as generating companies as long as they don’t produce more than 2,000 kilowatts.  To see the text of the SB 981, click here.

The legislation also would direct the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to conduct a study that would help to establish a fair market price for retail electric customers who generate surplus power that could be sold back to the grid.

As the administration and Congress get down to brass tacks in slashing the federal budget, one would think that President Barack Obama’s proposal to cut $1.3 billion from EPA’s budget would be well-received by Republicans who have spent a lot of time this year criticizing the agency.  In fact, according to a story by Politico, that is in fact not the case.  Click here to read the Politico story:

For all their talk about the “job-killing” EPA, Republicans have a dirty little secret: They actually like many of the agency’s efforts, particularly bread-and-butter programs aimed at cleaning up drinking water and air pollution in their districts.

The Energy ReportAccording to a new report from the World Wildlife Federation (WWF), a fully sustainable and renewable global energy system is possible by 2050.  The Energy Report, researched for the WWF by Ecofys, a leading energy consulting firm in the Netherlands,  shows that humanity could meet 95 percent of energy needs with renewables utilising today’s technologies, and that in four decades we can have a world of vibrant economies and societies powered entirely by clean, cheap and renewable energy, with a vastly improved quality of life.

Click here to check out the report.

Congressman Joe Barton’s (R-Ennis, TX) office says he might introduce Texas-specific legislation to limit the reach of the Environmental Protection Agency, but for now he’s signing on as a co-sponsor to a measure filed yesterday aimed at stopping the federal regulation of greenhouse gases.

Barton is putting together a coalition of government officials at all levels along with business and industry groups to present a united front against EPA policies that he and other Texas Republicans say are strangling the state’s economy.

If Barton does file a Texas-specific measure, it would likely seek to rollback the EPA’s decision last year to halt the state’s flexible permitting program, which Texasrefineries have been relying on for some 15 years to get around federal pollution laws.

The legislation Barton has signed on to is sponsored by Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe, would effectively undo EPA’s decision to regulate greenhouse gases under the federal Clean Air Act. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the agency has the authority to issue such a regulation.

Texas Republican John Cornyn is a co-sponsor of the Senate version of the bill. Several Democratic congressmen from industrial states are also co-sponsoring the bills, even though many expect President Obama to veto any legislation that might reach his desk.

Texas is challenging the agency’s ruling in court on grounds that the state’s industries and refineries would be disproportionately harmed. At this time all other states have either adopted or put forth a plan to meet the current EPA standards.

The US Department of Energy (DOE) announced $27 million in projects to advance solar development and manufacturing through its SunShot Initiative whose goal is to achieve cost competitive solar energy by 2020.

The hope is that the SunShot initiative can reduce the total costs of photovoltaic solar energy systems by about 75 percent so that they are cost competitive at large scale with other forms of energy, without subsidies, before the end of the decade.  This level of cost reduction would make the cost of solar roughly $1 a watt – which would correspond to roughly 6 cents per kilowatt-hour – spurring the broad deployment of solar energy systems across the country and, at these price points, helping regain American economic competitiveness in the global market for solar photovoltaics.

The SunShot program builds on the legacy of President Kennedy’s 1960s “moon shot” goal, which laid out a plan to regain the country’s lead in the space race and land a man on the moon. The program hopes to aggressively drive innovations in the ways that solar systems are conceived, designed, manufactured and installed.

In addition to investing in improvements in cell technologies and manufacturing, the SunShot initiative will also focus on steps to streamline and digitize local permitting processes that will reduce installation and permitting costs. To achieve the SunShot goal of reducing the total installed cost of large scale solar electricity by about 75 percent, DOE will be working closely with partners in government, industry, research laboratories and academic institutions across the country.

For more information and to follow the initiative’s progress, visit the SunShot Initiative webpage.

Several bills filed this session, which included some heard at Wednesday’s hearing of the Senate Intergovernmental Relations Committee would preclude homeowners’ associations from restricting installation of solar energy devices.  These are:

Compromises may be in the works to tweak bills for smooth passage.  At the hearing, West, who chairs the committee,  reached out to the Homeowners Associations (HOA) in hopes of striking a balance and avoiding an impasse.

Homeowners have complained that HOAs are unfairly, and sometimes arbitrarily, preventing them from making their abodes more energy efficient using solar technology. The HOAs want to preserve their ability to protect property values from unsafe and unattractive equipment. The green energy industry, environmentalists, some developers and some realtors want to see more solar power used in Texas.

In the House, compromise language already is being crafted.  One potential sticking point is whether to give HOAs any discretion over approval of the design or appearance of solar devices. Some members believe the issue has gone beyond property rights to include energy sufficiency, electricity conservation and grid stabilization.

West said he hopes that if he can convince his colleagues in both houses to ease HOA restrictions on solar energy, they may be more likely to pass SB 142, his latest attempt at comprehensive HOA reform. He has not yet set it for hearing.

According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News public opinion poll released yesterday morning, cutting subsidies for new reactors is the single most popular possible budget cut, with 57% finding such cuts either completely or mostly acceptable. No other program got more than 52% support for budget cuts, and most programs slated for cuts received far less than 50% public approval for such cuts. You can read the entire poll here (the program comparison is on page 15 of the documents).

Page 15 of the March 3rd Wall Street Journal Poll

The existing Department of Energy loan “guarantee” program has $10.2 Billion in unspent money for new reactor construction and another $2 Billion for uranium enrichment plants. Why should Congress be cutting programs like legal services for the poor, public broadcasting, college loans, and dozens of other programs when that money is sitting there and should never be used anyway?

The budget as approved by the House of Representatives, while slashing many worthwhile programs, at least does not include new loan money for nuclear reactor construction. But there is a chance that the Senate will try to add, with Department of Energy support, billions to the program (called Title 17). And, if this attempt is made, it will likely be in the next two weeks.

So act now. America has spoken and a large outpouring right now could make a difference.

Let’s tell Congress now: no new taxpayer subsidies for nuclear reactors and cut all of the existing subsidies once and for all. We won’t accept massive budget cuts in programs that matter in order to give our money to wealthy nuclear utilities and foreign reactor manufacturers.

Better yet, be a governor. That's what Arnold did!

Phillip Martin has been writing for Burnt Orange Report since he was a wee young thing, and while I wouldn’t call him jaded, he is far from naive about politics and not an overly sentimental sort.  Yet, his post on last night’s testimony by the Dream Activists certainly brought out the idealist in him.  His post starts out:

They were born in Honduras and Mexico, Guatemala and America. They overcame human trafficking and shootings, physical borders and cultural boundaries that told them at every step of the way, “you do not belong here.” But last night, with tales and testimony that brought smiles and laughter to Republicans and Democrats in the House State Affairs Committee, over thirty Dream Act students — better known as Dream Activists — from universities across Texas refused the notion that they do not belong here.

Click here to read Phillip Martin’s blog on last night’s immigration bill hearing.

Corporations aren’t people and elections shouldn’t be for sale. 

If you agree, you’ll love “The Story of Citizens United v. FEC,” a new 8-minute animated short by Annie Leonard, of The Story of Stuff fame.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5kHACjrdEY]

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, we have overwhelming evidence of the damage done to our democracy. Leonard explains the ruling, its fallout and why we need to overturn it.

Watch the video then help rescue democracy by clicking here and taking action.