THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
Canadian
Institute for Business and the Environment
Fisherville,
Ontario, Canada
Tel. 416
410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231
Vol. 13, No. 1, January 24, 2008
Honoured Reader Edition
****************************************************
This is the honoured reader edition of the
Gallon Environment Letter and is distributed at no charge: send a note with
Add GL or Delete GL in the subject line to subscriptions@gallonletter.ca.
Paid subscribers receive a more complete edition without subscription reminders
and with extensive links to further information following almost every article.
Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus GST and provide additional benefits
detailed on the web site. Organizational subscribers also receive the monthly
Sustainable Technology & Services Supplement. Individual subscriptions
are only $30 (personal emails/funds only please) including GST. If you would
like to subscribe please visit http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
If you feel you should be receiving the paid subscriber edition or have
other subscriber questions please contact us also at subscriptions@gallonletter.ca.
This current free edition is posted on the web site about a week or so after
its issue at http://www.cialgroup.com/whatsnew.htm.
Back free editions from January 2007 are available at http://www.cialgroup.com/whatsnew-a.htm
****************************************************
ABOUT THIS
ISSUE
Many people think that asbestos is one of
those chemicals from the past, with little impact today, but Canada and other
industrial countries continue to mine and export asbestos, mostly to the
developing world, and allow its use in products used in Canada and the US.
Public health officials and worker activists as well as actuaries are sending
out an alarm that asbestos disease has yet to peak and continued asbestos
production and use will lead to an 'asbestos time bomb' of disease and death. In
industrial countries, occupational protection of workers may be growing stronger
but end-users of products often have little protection and may not even know if
and when they are exposed to airborne asbestos fibres. We begin 2008 with a
powerful exposé about asbestos. This is the first of a two part asbestos update,
with the second part to come in a near future issue.
We have shifted our EcoCouncillor Award
nomination schedule from Fall to Winter so that nominees can include a full year
of environmental activities by their favourite local politician. But the
nomination is not limited to one year of activities - everything the nominee has
done while a member of a municipal or band council is fair game. Nominations for
the 2007 award will close on Thursday 20 March and details of how to nominate or
self-nominate for the Gallon Environment Letter Fourth Annual EcoCouncillor
Award are included in this issue.
There is a plethora of environmental action,
or perhaps it is mostly environmental talk, at the moment and our editorial
presents not-too-rosy green vision of Canada in 2008. We receive, and encourage,
letters to the editor and this issue we have one that argues with the Chief
Hydrogeologist of Canada (see Letter in last issue). We will leave it to you to
judge this one.
One of our book reviews this issue is Plan B
3.0 from Lester Brown. Brown will be well known to many of our readers. As time
goes by it seems he is becoming yet more controversial but his ideas are at
least always stimulating. A second reviewed book, maybe even more profound than
Plan B 3.0, is called The Culture of Flushing, and it is not about Flushing,
N.Y.. Our humourous afterword is on the same topic.
GL's editor is familiar with noted Canadian
climate change sceptic Tim Ball. Readers may also know that Tim sued University
of Lethbridge (Alberta) professor Dan Johnson
for defamation. We have been wanting to cover this slap suit for some time
but it was unwise for all involved to do so while it was before the courts.
Now it is over and GL is pleased to bring you an exclusive interview with
the slappee. While we do not have proof, various commentators have suggested
that Tim Ball's efforts were funded by the friendly motoring petroleum people
and others. Some friends!
Finally, while we generally try not to cover
stories that have been so well covered in the mainstream press, how could we not
touch on the Chalk River mess. We are absolutely thrilled to know that Stephen
is now in charge of our 'nucular' (as pronounced by George W. Bush) safety.
Next issue we may bring you part two of the
asbestos mess. But then again, we might not. That's the nature of the
environment business today. Happy Motoring through this issue.
***********************************
ENVIRONMENT
& BUSINESS: A ROCKY PROGNOSIS FOR CANADA
Sometimes forgotten is the fact that Gallon
Environment Letter is published by the Canadian Institute for Environment and
Business. It is not surprising that this simple fact gets forgotten because the
concept of environment as a critical, and potentially profitable, business issue
is often ignored in Canada. In the UK, major retailers like Marks and Spencer
and Tesco give their environmental plans and programs very high profile through
in-store advertising. In the US, business environmental and climate change
conferences are attracting large crowds. Greener (if you believe the claims)
cars are profiled at the Detroit Auto Show and in dealer showrooms. In Europe,
environmentally and socially responsible stock indices and corporate
environmental initiatives are regularly profiled in the press. In Canada, it is
difficult to find much of any of these things except during 'Earth month' in
April.
For reasons that we only partially understand,
even Canadian divisions of US companies frequently give less attention to
environmental performance or environmental marketing than their US parent.
Durable green consumer products that are available in the US do not always make
it to the Canadian market and when they do their green attributes are often not
touted as loudly as happens in the US. Overall it is our subjective assessment
that green business has a much lower profile in Canada than in just about every
other OECD country.
Our discussions over many years indicate that
there are a few, but not enough, identifiable reasons for this:
1) Canadian society is less enthusiastic about
free enterprise than US society. The idea that companies can make money by going
green has less appeal here than in the US or elsewhere. Canadians still embrace
the notion that governments solve environmental problems.
2) Our political leaders have no idea that
more environmental expertise is to be found in the private sector than in
academia, government, or non-governmental organizations. Most politicians think
that if they consult with environmental non-governmental organizations, engos,
they have been provided with the ultimate in environmental wisdom.
3) Engos are not as inclined to invite
business to participate in their work as do engos in other countries. Of course,
all ngos are looking for donations and contributions of money but only a few
take the time to sit down with business to develop the ultimate win-win-win
solution.
4) Some opinion leaders actively undermine the
environmental agenda. For example, the media often stills sees it as necessary
to provide balance by giving space and time to climate change denyers. In most
countries, these people are laughed out of town. The leadership of the Canadian
Auto Workers actively encourages the purchase of gas guzzling vehicles that are
assembled in Big Three plants in Canada instead of encouraging Canadian assembly
of more fuel efficient vehicles.
Even if these observations were completely
valid, it would still hardly be enough to explain why green business is so rare
in Canada. I invite your comments, agreeing or disagreeing, on my
observations.
In addition to your observations, three or
four fairly major events are likely to put Canada's green identity to the test
in 2008:
- It looks like we are going to have a federal
election in 2008 and it looks like environment will not be on the agenda. The
Conservative party clearly will not want to talk about the environment; the
Liberals seem to feel they have too much baggage in terms of years of little
more than rhetoric on climate change; the NDP seems to have mostly forgotten
the environment and gave its full support to the appointment of Stephen Harper
as Canada's Chief Nuclear Regulator in the Chalk River fiasco, and the Greens
seem to be working hard to assure everyone that they have a position on
everything beyond green.
- Economic downturns have traditionally bumped
environment from a high position in public opinion polls. Some of my
colleagues think that this time will be different. I doubt it. The current
governing party would just love to talk more about the economy than the
environment and will encourage the media to drop the environment file. Even
before 1987, when the Brundtland Commission told us that people do not pay
much attention to the environment when they are facing economic stress, it was
apparent that environment is a major public policy issue only when the economy
is doing well.
- The next major international conference of
the parties to the Kyoto Protocol and the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change will be held in Poland in December, 2008. Unless Canada has adopted a
very solid GHG reduction program by that time we will be the eco-bete noir of
the world.
- Not so much an event but a happening: much of
Canada's environment industry seems doomed, or inclined, depending on your
perspective, to allow itself to fall into foreign hands.
This completes the circle, bringing me back to
where I began. Much of the relatively small amount of green business that is
underway in Canada is led by foreign-owned companies. Should that tell us
something?
Colin Isaacs
Editor
****************************************************
NOMINATE NOW
FOR THE 2007 ECOCOUNCILLOR AWARD
Nominations for Canada's Fourth Annual
Eco-Councillor Award and Roll of Honour are now being received. Here are the
details:
1) We invite you to nominate an elected
municipal politician (mayor, alderman, alderperson, councillor, member of
municipal council, First Nation Chief, or Councillor) who has performed
outstanding environmental service in a neighbourhood, municipality, province, or
First Nation. The outstanding environmental service should be connected to the
person's role as an elected politician and may be in the form of pushing for an
excellent environmental policy or program or running an outstanding
environmental project. We leave the definition of what constitutes an
environmental project to you, except to note that GL particularly likes the
concept of Sustainable Development which incorporates environmental, economic,
and social aspects.
2) Send a brief description, no more than 300
words, describing the outstanding environmental performance performed by the
individual. If you wish you may attach a modest number of documents (not more
than five pages, Adobe PDF please) supporting the application.
3) Include the name of the politician, their
municipality or council, position, and contact information. Also include the
name and contact information of the nominator.
4) Unfortunately we must limit nominations to
elected politicians in Canadian municipalities and First Nations.
5) To ensure we find the very best of Canada's
environmentally-oriented local politicians, we will accept self-nominations.
However, politicians who nominate themselves should include third-party
endorsation either in the form of a letter from a local environmentalist or a
copy of an article from a newspaper or independent newsletter describing their
work.
Send your nominations by email to editor@gallonletter.ca with the subject line Eco-Councillor contest.
Attachments containing supplementary information are acceptable but should
consist of no more than 5 pages. The deadline for entries is Thursday March
20th. However we urge you not to wait until the last minute.
Remember, only municipal councillors who are
nominated can make it on to the Gallon Environment Letter Honour Role of
Eco-Councillors.
Details of the awards ceremony will be
published in the February editions of Gallon Environment Letter. Those nominated
for the 2004, 2005, and 2006 Rolls of Honour may be nominated again for 2007,
except for the 2006 winners Councillor Marguerite Ceschi-Smith, City of
Brantford, Ontario, and Mayor Kevin Edwards, Town of Three Hills,
Alberta.
****************************************************
****************************************************
Asbestos Part 1 Domestic Canada and
US
Asbestos is not a new problem. In fact, it was
one of the earliest substances deemed to be a human carcinogen. Many countries
are getting very concerned about asbestos, and we will bring you an update of
the situation in both the OECD and the developing world in a future issue of GL,
but in this issue we'll focus in North America, in at least the northern part
where one more rarely hears about problems with asbestos.
****************************************************
ASBESTOS
PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS ARE COSTING AMERICA A FORTUNE
An overview of asbestos claims issues and
trends by the American Academy of Actuaries tells a story of continuing
dangerous exposure to asbestos in the US and around the world.
Asbestos
Use
People continue to be exposed to
asbestos:
- While in 1982, it was estimated that 27.5
Americans were significantly exposed to asbestos through industries (e.g.
shipbuilding, construction), more recent estimates are that 100 million people
in the US were occupationally exposed in the last century or so.
- Asbestos use in the US peaked at 1 million
tons in 1973 with occupational health and safety laws reducing workplace
exposure. In 2000, US consumption of asbestos was 15,000 metric tons.
- In 2000, US consumption was only 1 per cent
of world consumption, 1.5 million metric tons. Many asbestos products such as
drinking water and sewage pipes are cheap so developing countries such as
Russia, China, Brazil, India and Thailand use them but with few precautions.
Many people in these countries will succumb to asbestos-related diseases.
- A global asbestos ban will still leave
residual exposure through previously manufactured asbestos-containing
products, dust or waste from previous use or incomplete disposal and erosion
of natural asbestos deposits. This exposure of individuals will last for an
indefinite amount of time.
- The US EPA attempt to ban asbestos in 1989
was overruled by US courts so products containing asbestos are still
legal.
- There are few protections in place for
end-users of asbestos products. There were about 3,500 products in the US
containing asbestos in 1989. End uses are barely tracked and warning labels
requirements are weak.
Asbestos Litigation
Up to 1973 in the US, limits on compensation
were set by the workers' compensation system but the court case Borel vs
Fibreboard (1973) succeeded in holding manufacturers of asbestos-containing
products strictly liable for failing to warn workers of the unreasonable danger
of their products. Courts have added to the costs by awarding for emotional
harm, medical monitoring and punitive damages. The number of asbestos claims is
overwhelming some state court systems. In a lifetime, a worker may have been in
a number of different jobs so one case may list a large number of defendants and
may depend on the bankruptcy status of companies (see below). The range of
diseases workers are suffering from also creates complications; in some cases,
companies believes the claims are not legitimate. There is also forum shopping
where plaintiff lawyers seek to have cases tried in more sympathetic states. If
one state enacts limits on compensation, then the case may be litigated in other
states. Lawsuits also name defendants who are not primary manufacturers or
mining companies but who own a building with asbestos in it or who distribute
products containing asbestos. Among asbestos defendants have been Campbell's
Soup, Gerber, and Sears Roebuck. Some of these peripheral defendants are bearing
some of the major costs of awards in asbestos cases because they are solvent
while the other defendants declare bankruptcy.
RAND has estimated that 730,000 asbestos
claims have been filed through 2002 with over 8,000 companies as defendants.
Defendants or their insurers have paid about $70 billion; more than half is
legal and other costs so only 42% or $30 million has been received by the
plaintiffs. The ultimate costs of asbestos personal injury claims in the US are
estimated to be $200-250 billion, a wide range because of uncertainty about
incidences of disease, nature of disease and costs of legal services. Insurers
will pay about $60-70 billion of this.
The Manville
Personal Injury Trust
Johns-Mansville Corporation, the largest
manufacturer of asbestos-containing products and supplier in the US, filed for
bankruptcy in 1982 due to asbestos claims. The Manville Personal Injury Trust
was set up to distribute the assets among the current and future claimants and
is seen as an alternative to litigation. Many other approaches to tort law have
been proposed but many questions arise which the report discusses with the idea
that litigation is not efficient. From the defendants point of view, some
progress in litigation has been made. Some jurisdiction have begun to limit
nonmalignancy claims, combination of claimants into one lawsuit, and choice of
venues. Challenges have been successful against some chest X-rays in
non-malignancy claims.
Bankruptcy
Eighty bankruptcies in the US have been the
result of asbestos claims. Forty-seven states have at least one company
declaring bankruptcy. There has been a start to challenging prepackaged
bankruptcies; these are when the company still has money to pay the claim but
enters bankruptcy to escape the claims. A total 52,000 - 60,000 jobs have been
lost due to asbestos-related bankruptcies in the US. The average worker who lost
one of those jobs has missed out on $25,000 to $50,000 in wages over his/her
employment life and $8,300 in pension.
There is considerable uncertainty about the
future costs of asbestos claims. Because of the long latency period for disease,
issues about preserving the rights of the person who is not ill but may be in
the future must be considered. Average latency varies among the diseases
including mesothelioma, lung cancer, other cancers, asbestosis, and pleural
changes. For example, mesothelioma's average latency is 30-40 years and is fatal
within 1-2 years. For this reason, it is becoming common to consider the future
claims in bankruptcy distributions.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
ASBESTOS: A
CANADIAN KILLER
Asbestos is a term that has been heard
everywhere in regard to buildings, construction, and disasters. Meeting minutes
from public institutions such as schools, hospitals, municipal halls, and
universities routinely contain reference shutdowns of sections or whole
buildings for asbestos abatement. Associated with these cost expenditures is a
whole industry of inspections, laboratories, remediation services and waste
hauling.
A recent National Post article by Jennifer
Wagler discussed the reconstruction of Regent Park, a 50 year Toronto Community
Housing site. Don Bremner, President of Restoration Environmental Contractors
which carried out the first phase demolition phase, said they saved appliances,
windows, and cabinets, recycling almost 95% of the deconstruction waste. But
first, asbestos on paint, tiles and insulation had to be removed and dealt
with.
What Is
Asbestos
Asbestos is a generic name for a number of
naturally occurring hydrated mineral silicates. These don't burn in air; they
separate into fibres and have a unique crystalline structure. These features
have given its name which is a greek word meaning unquenchable or
indestructable.
There are two mineral classifications of
asbestos: serpentine and amphibole. Each is then divided further:
Serpentine Asbestos includes Chrysotile (white
asbestos - long wavy fibres), the most common commercially
Amphibole Asbestos:
- Amosite (brown asbestos -straighter and
shorter fibres than white)
- Crocidolite (blue asbestos - long
straight)
- Fibrous Tremolite
- Fibrous Anthophyllite
- Fibrous Actinolite
Asbestos is mined in open pits and then the
ore holding the mineral is crushed to extract the fibres. About 90% of global
use of asbestos is chrysotile.
Asbestos was and is used because it is
incombustible, strong, flexible and cheap. Often it is used to bind or reinforce
cement or plastic. Its adherence on the product can range from well bound to
capable of releasing airborne fibres. In Canada and the US manufacturing,
sprayed insulation, stucco and cements with asbestos are no longer
made.
Risk
Assessment
Different jurisdictions have different
methodologies for assessing asbestos risk and what to do about it. GL talked
recently to a former provincial environmental official who said all the asbestos
removal was a complete waste of money and could cause more asbestos to become
airborne; all asbestos should be sealed in place. This is an opinion commonly
expressed but not accepted by many especially those who don't want to be
exposed. The following are selected from the 2007 Alberta Asbestos Abatement
Manual which includes:
Definitions such as:
- Asbestos-containing material is any that
contains one percent or more asbestos.
- Asbestos Waste - discarded materials from
which there is a reasonable chance that asbestos might be released and become
airborne, and includes disposable protective clothing that has been used in a
restricted area.
- Aspect Ratio - the ratio of the length of a
fibre compared to its width. Longer, thinner fibres having a potential
carcinogenic hazard with large ratios over 5:1 and over 100:1. Fibres which
are not hazards may fragment and become so.
- Friable Material - material that can be
crumbled by hand. The more friable the material, the greater the potential
hazard due to fibre release.
Asbestos is
permitted for use in Canada.
Well-bound asbestos can be found in parts of
buildings including asbestos cement roof or wall panels, roofing felts, stucco,
brick and block morter, insulation in exterior walls, vinyl asbestos flooring
tiles or asbestos paper backing on flooring, ceiling tiles, acoustic finishes,
plaster or drywall compounds, thermal spray on walls or wall cavity insulation,
insulation in boilers, pipes, ducts, chillers, fireproofing on structural
supports, domestic water supply and drains pipe insulation, wire insulation,
fume hood lining and ducts, elevator brake shoe, fire dampers, emergency
generators, theatre curtains, welding blankets, and duct tape.
Loosely bound or unbound asbestos in buildings
is found in insulating cements, sprayed insulation, insulation blocks and
textiles and in vermiculite insulation from W. R. Grace in Libby,
Montana called Zonolite (see article on W. R. Grace).
The most hazardous is friable asbestos such as
sprayed acoustic or thermal insulation; friable means it can be crushed by hand.
Sprayed asbestos was introduced in 1950, approved by the Underwriters'
Laboratory for fireproofing and used in many public and commercial buildings.
Although many uses stopped in 1972, acoustic products containing asbestos
continued to be used.
In non-building products, asbestos may be in
brake linings, gaskets, plastics, textiles, millboards and paper, filters and
electrical insulation.
Risks and
Management Options
As long as the asbestos is bound, it is
unlikely to be a hazard but there is always a risk because the situation can
change. People who don't know that they are dealing with asbestos (or ignore the
hazard) can damage the surface through maintenance and repair or water damage
can cause damage. Fibres can be released if the product is cut, abraded, sanded,
cracked, or just deteriorates from general wear and tear. Because of many uses
and different thicknesses and appearances, it is not possible to eyeball a
product or building to see if it contains asbestos; a laboratory evaluation is
necessary.
Management options include removal, enclosing,
encapsulating or leaving it alone (but with a management plan).
It is not possible to manage asbestos located
in air systems where air can damage material, where water or vibration can lead
to damage, where the general public has access and somebody can damage the
material deliberately or inadvertently or if materials are friable and near
maintenance areas.
The manual lists eight major factors for
evaluating the condition of an asbestos area such as condition of material and
exposed area which will also include hidden areas such as above suspended
ceilings if personnel access that area. These factors are used to assess whether
the risk is high, medium or low and combined with measure of asbestos in air,
determine what level of control is needed (immediate control, control required
or no control required).
Health
Effects
The health risk of asbestos arise because the
fibre can be split along the length to be extremely fine. Airborne asbestos has
a average diameter of 0.11 to 0.24 micrometres or 300 times thinner than human
hair and tends to float around in the air or even if it falls, get easily
airborne again. When breathed into the lungs, it gets stuck in the
tissue.
Asbestos has been used for thousands of years
and even the Greeks and Romans noticed that slaves weaving asbestos cloth
suffered from lung sickness.
In the 1930, asbestosis was identified, in
1949 lung cancer was linked to asbestosis and in 1960 in South Africa asbestos
was linked to cancer of the lining of the lungs, mesothelioma, a very rare
cancer in the general population. Unlike asbestosis which is generally an
occupational disease, mesothelioma may occur due to non-occupational
exposure.
It may take 15 to 55 years with an average of
40 years to get terminally ill. Mesothelioma kills half of patients within a
year, most die within two years. Other cancers are linked to
asbestos.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
THETFORD
MINES: COMMUNITY RISK FROM ASBESTOS
In 2003-2004, the Asbestos Victims Association
of Quebec undertook an exploratory sampling of the air and soil in the
residential community of asbestos mining towns. A recent International Journal
of Occupation and Environmental Health reports on the study and concludes that
asbestos is a public health threat near Thetford Mines, the centre of the
asbestos mining district in southern Quebec about 100 kilometres south of Quebec
City. Data was collected from sampling of air and soil from 26 homes in the area
with support from the Asbestos Victims Association of Quebec. The risk of
contracting asbestos-related cancer from in-home exposure for 30 years from
in-home air based on the 28 air samples is estimated at 1 in 10,000. Of 14 soil
samples from driveways and backyard, seven had chrysotile content of 10%, three
had greater than 60% and one had 100%.
The article explores a number of issues which
seem to echo themes common to emerging health/environmental
threats:
- industry suppression of medical and
scientific information about the dangers of exposure to asbestos.
- denial of the health hazard of
chryosotile.
- occupational thresholds which are levels
insufficient to protect workers.
- trade union support for asbestos to protect
jobs.
- need to expand list of notifiable diseases to
allow for investigation of effects of exposure.
- addressing non-occupational exposure due to
increased asbestos concentrations in the ambient air. No compensation for lay
people is yet made available.
- obligation on victims to pay for studies to
prove that asbestos concentration is too high. Retired miner Herve Rousseau
paid for such a study in 1993 with support from Greenpeace in 1994 This
eventually led to the formation of the victims associations.
The source of the dust included
- outside earthworks which contained asbestos,
either covered or exposed.
- asbestos materials inside the house such as
stove pipe insulation, asbestos sheets, plaster containing asbestos and vinyl
linoleum containing asbestos. However, most of the homes did not contain
asbestos material so the source was from outside.
- dust brought from work either recently or in
earlier years including asbestos from brake pads.
The article includes a description of how the
samples were analyzed in the laboratories and what protocols cover the handling
of the samples and counting of fibres. The article shows a photo of a youth
driving an ATV over asbestos piles.
Funding for the study and help for the study
came from : the Environmental Health Fund; Mining Watch Canada; the Canadian
Association of University Teachers (CAUT); the Alberta Workers' Health Centre;
the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers, Inc.; the White Lung
Association; the Communications Energy and Paper Workers Union of Canada, Local
85.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CHRYSOTILE
INSTITUTE
The Chrysotile Institute provides an industry
web site promoting the idea that chrysotile asbestos can be used safely and that
chrysotile is different from other asbestos and safe, a view not generally
agreed on by those researching public health. An article on the site counters
the research reported for Thetford (see separate article) arguing that the
concentrations of airborne fibre in homes was too low to present measurable and
unacceptable risk.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CANADIAN
CANCER SOCIETY: PHASE OUT ASBESTOS
In July 2007, the Canadian Cancer Society
called on the federal government to develop a comprehensive asbestos strategy
leading to the eventual phasing out of both the use and export of asbestos. Only
by stopping exposure to asbestos can asbestos-related diseases be
stopped.
In Canada, litigation is generally not an
option as the worker compensation boards assess whether compensation is to be
given. According to the Canadian Cancer Society's figures about a third of the
1,097 workplace deaths in Canada in 2005 were due to asbestos.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CANADIAN
GOVERNMENT ALLOWS ASBESTOS IN TOYS
In the US a few politicians have been
criticizing the presence of asbestos in consumer products and elsewhere. One
such has been US Senator Patty Murray from Washington State. In October,
Murray's Bill S.741, the Ban Asbestos in America Act, passed the US Senate and
could mean the US joins the 40 countries (e.g. South Africa, EU, Japan,
Australia) which have already banned asbestos usually with some exemptions. The
bill requires regulations that prohibit import, manufacture, processing, or
distributing asbestos-containing materials subject to limited
exemptions.
In Canada, Pat Martin, NDP MP for Winnipeg
Centre been active on asbestos issues for some time promoting the removal of
Zonalite insulation (see W.R. Grace article) and an overall ban including toys.
Some of the provisions for asbestos in the federal Hazardous Products Act date
back years but instead of updating them, the Asbestos Products Regulations were
not to make any changes but to compile this information into one document. The
regulation came into force November 15, 2007 and continues to allow the use of
asbestos in consumer products unless these cause airborne fibres. Martin says
that Canadians probably think that asbestos is already banned in consumer
products and "You would have to be crazy to put asbestos in children's
toys."
CSI
Fingerprint Toy
In December 2007, Murray thanked major toy
retailers Toys "R" Us and KP Toys for stopping sales of the Planet Toys CSI
Fingerprint Examination Kit which she said contained asbestos, according to
information provided by The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization and the
Environmental Working Group. Her letter was also addressed to Walgreens. The toy
encourages children to blow on the powder sending asbestos-containing dust
into the air.
In December 2007, the State of Connecticut
Department of Health tested the CSI Fingerprint Toy and Commissioner Farrel of
the Department of Consumer Products said that, "Lab results indicate that the
composition and crystalline structure of the fibers is most consistent with
tremolite, a form of asbestos and a toxic hazardous substance. Given the
potential health hazards associated with any asbestos contact, we are removing
the item from sale immediately, and are asking consumers to take swift measures
to make sure their children aren't exposed to the product. There is no 'safe'
level of asbestos.'
According to the Commissioner, the state will
be investigating "how the manufacturer, Planet Toys, Inc. of New York, and
various retailers responded to the results of the original 18 month scientific
study conducted by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, (ADAO) which
initially reported the presence of asbestos in the CSI toy' on November 27,
2007.
Two days after Connecticut issued a state-wide
recall of all CSI Fingerprint Examination Kits, Planet Toys said it was asking
all retailers to remove the kits immediately on a voluntary basis and store them
until the company could sort out the problems.
At the end of November 2007, Martin also
released warnings against the toys.
On January 15, Planet Toy issued a press
release that it has contacted with Paradigm Testing Laboratories in Rochester,
New York and conducted same-day tests on 18 different samples of the fingerprint
powder and found no asbestos.
GL wonders whether a real CSI team is needed
to sort out this mystery of conflicting "what is in this product" stories.
It is easy - either the manufacturer has put asbestos into the toy or it has
not. GL suggests that, where there is evidence of a toxic substance in toys
and other consumer products, government investigators should have the right
of access to manufacturing facilities anywhere in the world. If the right
is not granted the product should be automatically banned from the marketplace,
in the same way that those who are believed to be drunk and who refuse a breathalyser
are separated from their vehicles. If a product is found to contain asbestos
that could become airborne, GL suggests serious legal action up to and including
charges against the CEO of the offending company, just as those who rip off
shareholders are beginning to be sentenced to jail. Unfortunately, successive
Canadian governments have for a long time felt that the jobs of a small number
of Canadian workers are more important than the health of children.
Paid subscribers see links to original
documents and references here.
****************************************************
W. R. GRACE: A
REGULATORY DISGRACE
In January 2007, US Senator Max Baucus, senior
Montana Senator (Democrat), paid tribute to Les Skramstad, a worker activist in
Libby, Montana who drew attention to the tragedy of thousands of people who
suffered diseases due to tremolite asbestos exposure and over 200 who died of
asbestos-related diseases. Baucus said that when he first met Skramstad over
huckleberry pie and coffee, he was told unimaginable stories of suffering and
tragedy. The Senator and local guy worked together to:
- launch the Center for Asbestos Related
Diseases to screen and provide health care.
- kick the US Environmental Protection Agency
into gear and list Libby as a Superfund site (listed in 1999). The EPA in an
internal audit released information in 2001 that they knew about the asbestos
contamination in 1977.
- secure millions for cleanup, health care and
economic development.
The Senator committed to continuing to work on
behalf of Libby, "But, sadly, Mr. President there is still much more do to. Much
more. Libby residents deserve compensation for their injuries. They deserve
health care. They deserve to see those responsible go to prison for what they
did. They deserve to know that their town is clean of asbestos." Before he died,
Skramstad told a local newspaper that he thought Grace was guilty of murder, "I
started in 1959 and I was as healthy as a horse, I knew all the guys that worked
there, 135 employees when I was there. And there's five of us left alive. Five.
The rest of them are gone."
About 1,200 residents from Libby are
identified as suffering from some kind of asbestos-related abnormality. Health
studies on residents of the Libby area show increased incidence of many types of
asbestos related disease, including a rate of lung cancer that is 30 percent
higher than expected when compared with rates in other areas of Montana and the
United States.
One of the reasons, so many people were harmed
in Libby is that W. R. Grace was mining vermiculite and making a vermiculite
insulation called Zonolite. The asbestos was a natural contaminant of the
vermiculite. Although regulations were in place for occupational exposure for
processing asbestos, they were weak to non-existent when asbestos was a
contaminant. There are many kinds of asbestos but only six are covered under US
federal regulation and tremolite asbestos from Libby wasn't one of the six. The
federal regulations apply when asbestos is used to make products but asbestos in
the vermiculite isn't deliberate. so, the regulations which deal with commercial
applications do not address it.
In 2005, a federal grand jury in Montana
indicted W. R. Grace and seven current and former executives for knowingly
endangering residents of Libby, Montana and concealing information about the
health affects of its asbestos mining operations. The charges alleged that the
company endangered not only the workers but also their families and the
community. Workers were allowed to leave the work site covered in asbestos dust,
waste vermiculite was given to residents for their garden and for foundations
for running tracks and an outdoor ice rink. The company was charged with selling
asbestos-contaminated property without making the buyers aware of the nature and
extent of the contamination. There have been several trials and appeals
including defence lawyers alleging time had run out for criminal charges,
disputes about witnesses and documents such as critical environmental health
studies on the hazards of asbestos. David Uhlmann of the University of Michigan
and formerly head of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Justice Department
called "this the most significant case ever brought under the federal
environmental crimes program." The regional paper The Missoulian publishes
consistently on this story and provides occasional links to other sources such
as court cases. In December 2007, journalist Tristan Scott reported the 9th
Circuit US Court of Appeals had reversed six decisions originally favouring the
defence in September. Leave to appeal is likely to made to the US Supreme Court.
As well as Les Skramstad who was a key witness, a manager of the mine facing
charges has died, of cancer.
Workers and the community were unaware of the
danger they were in for years and many of those still alive feel they should
have been warned by government agencies instead of being abandoned. The EPA is
now on the next phase of asbestos clean up the mine, has already dug up 45,000
cubic yards of contaminated soils from residential properties in two
communities, Libby and Troy. The problem, according to EPA's Paul Peronard, is
that they don't know how far the contamination has spread. Both indoor and
outdoor locations are affected. Some like Senator Baucus want the area declared
an emergency area. The community was invited to an EPA workshop on January 10,
2008 on next steps for the clean-up.
Bankruptcy
Court Makes Compensation Decisions
W.R. Grace filed for bankruptcy in 2001
staying all class actions and potential claims. Individuals can still make
claims but must do so individually. On December 19, 2007, the US Department of
Justice released a press release that W. R. Grace would pay $34 million
bankruptcy settlement for cleanup costs at 32 Superfund sites to be released
when the US Bankruptcy Court makes its decision. The environmental cleanup
claims for Libby (as well as another site near Baltimore) is not yet resolved
and the claim is pending.
It will be a bankruptcy judge in Delaware who
decides the fate of the asbestos workers. A decision based on a trial January
14, 2008 will determine how much money is needed for the company's Chapter 11
exit plan. If the amount is $700 million or so, they will pay the asbestos bill
and have money for shareholders. If the asbestos liabilities are $2-3 billion,
then the company will no longer belong to the shareholders but to those who
filed asbestos claims. Some say the asbestos liability is $3.7 billion.
Investors hope that some of the claims will be proven bogus.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
EBR PETITION:
ASBESTOS IN SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS
One of the topics discussed by the
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario 2006-2007 Annual Report was asbestos
waste. Two applicants had requested a review (denied by the Ontario Ministry of
the Environment) to change the definition of asbestos under Regulation 347 which
currently is "non-hazardous solid industrial waste”. They recommended that MOE
take action including:
- legislating a cradle to grave approach for
all handling and disposing of asbestos waste.
- integrating communication and legislation,
protocols, standards and guidelines for asbestos handling and disposal as well
as health and safety requirements.
- stop allowing the disposal of asbestos in
landfills only allowed to accept non-hazardous solid waste.
- inspect landfills without giving prior notice
to ensure that asbestos waste is being handled as required by Reg.
347.
The applicants provided a great deal of
supporting evidence described in the Supplement of the annual report leading
them to argue that, asbestos is the "most pervasive environmental hazard in the
world" and is responsible for thousands of preventable cancer deaths globally
each year.Many products such as brake and clutch linings, gaskets of cars,
insulation, flooring, shingles, cement and plastics contain asbestos and these
products are often handled without due regard for Reg. 347. Municipal and
provincial environment officials claim that only a little bit of asbestos is
deposited in Ontario landfills now and again but the applicants dispute this.
Asbestos is a designated substance under the Ministry of Labour but not under
the Ministry of Environment.
The ECO report provides a background on the
history of the use of asbestos and suggests that "according to most experts,
asbestos fibres are primarily an occupational risk rather than an environmental
risk. Thus, the risk to the general population from environmental levels of
asbestos fibres in air (e.g., in a typical building containing asbestos
insulation) and in water, and from asbestos products (where the fibres are
bound) is negligible." GL notes that asbestos is one of those chemicals which
has no known dose-response threshold (see other articles in this issue and
the next one]
The report discusses various regulations
federally and provincially. For example, ambient air quality, definitions of
asbestos waste. For example, asbestos in friable form must be reported by
designated industries under the National Pollutant Release Inventory. Sixty four
facilities in Canada, 24 in Ontario, reported use of asbestos to the NPRI in
2005 with some reporting on-site and off-site discharges.
Ontario's Reg 347 Section 17, the ECO report
says, also requires standards for waste handling, packaging, transportation,
vehicles and disposal sites in relation to asbestos. For example, transporters
must have a certificate of approval C of A, asbestos waste must be in a sealed
container or if shipped in bulk handled by a C of A specific to asbestos. Best
practice guidelines for removal procedures include use of water or vacuum
collection methods and specific removal procedures for sites with substantial
asbestos waste. The Enforcement Branch of MOE has taken action against some
contractors who failed to meet the requirements for asbestos under Reg.
347.
The Ministry of Labour as of May 2007 has
eleven designated substances under the Occupational Health and Safety Act OHSA
including asbestos, lead, mercury and arsenic. Separate regulations set out
exposure thresholds for length of exposure time as well as control and measures.
In 1984, Ontario's Royal Commission on Matters of Health and Safety arising from
the use of asbestos in Ontario recommended increased protection of workers on
construction sites and creation of the Industrial Diseases Standards Panel. The
Commission, ECO says, resulted in changes to workers' compensation and
occupational safety laws. Personal protective gear is required including
respiratory equipment, medical surveillance and measurement of airborne fibres.
ECO concludes that the handling of asbestos waste generated by building repairs
and site redevelopment is enforced and failure has led to large
fines.
The smaller amounts of asbestos waste
associated with products manufactured with asbestos content that end up in
landfill regularly are not addressed by regulations. MOE denied that asbestos
disposed of in landfills has any environmental effects because it is 'inert, not
soluble and, if properly disposed in landfill' will be well contained and there
is little risk of off-site migration to potential receptors. The EU also permits
landfilling of asbestos waste such as from construction sites in non-hazardous
landfills if these are reasonably self-contained.
ECO comment is that MOE's reasons for denying
the application for review were acceptable given there are existing legal and
regulatory requirements and a reasonable framework for handling of asbestos
waste at Ontario's landfill sites. ECO doesn't believe that products destined
for disposal should be treated as hazardous waste. Since the federal government
regulates product safety, the applicants are encouraged to petition the federal
Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development or other federal
departments.
Just as an aside, GL suggests that anybody
doing research on environmental issues, check out these EBR reports. Because of
the number of ministries involved under the Environmental Bill of Rights and the
range of citizen petitions, there are few topics not explored here over the
years. The entire set of reports is available on the ECO web site or as a tiny
cd.
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario.
Reconciling our priorities, Annual Report 2006-2007.Supplement.
****************************************************
LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
Subject:
Great Lakes Water
As a resident of the Great Lakes Region, I
take exception to Dr. Rivera's description of the World's fresh water supply.
(Vol. 12 No. 12 December 10, 2007)
Although Dr. Rivera refers to the nearly 12
millions km3 of fresh water in the World as "renewable", this is hardly the
case. As farmers in the Sacramento Valley in California are acutely aware, the
fresh water aquifer on which their livelihood depends is a finite resource
which, when finally exhausted, will require thousands (if not tens of thousands)
of years to replenish. Coastal inhabitants should also be horrified to think
that anyone would suggest melting the glaciers or water permanently frozen in
the North and South Poles to extract their fresh water. This scenario is exactly
the disaster predicted by continued global warming trends.
90% of the World's fresh water in found in
groundwater. The remaining 10% of the World's fresh water referred to as
"surface water" includes all of the water permanently frozen in glaciers and at
the North and South Poles. Only the fraction of surface water found in rivers,
lakes and streams is truly "renewable", coming from a (hopefully) inexhaustible
supply of rainwater. I certainly cannot dispute Dr. Rivera's numbers, so the
Great Lakes are certainly not "20%" of the world's fresh water supply. However,
readers may get the mistaken impression that exploiting groundwater and frozen
glacial water is a substitute for rational water conservation. The Great Lakes
are truly a large fraction of the World's *renewable* fresh water
supply.
David Brzezinski, Ann Arbor,
Michigan
****************************************************
30 SECOND
SUMMARY
Gartner Lee, the Canadian "environmental,
science, economics, planning and engineering" consulting firm is now part of
AECOM Technology Corporation headquartered in Los Angeles, California. Ron
Portelli, Gartner Lee's VP Marketing and well-known for his active involvement
in the Canadian environment industry has announced his departure to join the
Alturki Group of Saudi Arabia. The annual revenues of the group are $350 million
and $1.8 billion when joint ventures are included. He will be Managing Director
of Alturki Environmental Services Company Ltd. focussing on environmental
consulting services in Bahrain. Also as a member of the Alturki Group's
corporate management team as Vice President, Environment Sector, he will build
the Alturki Group's environmental portfolio through joint ventures focussed on
the Middle East and India. Portelli, always a busy guy, will also be Chairman of
a relatively new company in India called Clean Earth Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.
Portelli is also on the Board of Directors of the Canada-Arab Business Council
(CABC) which promotes commercial relations between Canadian and Middle Eastern
and North African companies. Portelli will be at the Globe Conference in
Vancouver March 12 14 and at the Post-Globe Conference of which he is Conference
Chair in Toronto March 17-18.
****************************************************
BOOMERS PLAY A
KEY ROLE IN GROWTH OF ORGANICS
GUELPH, Ontario, January 7, 2008 - Author of
the national phenomenon, Boom, Bust & Echo, Dr. David Foot, will provide his
insight on how Canada's shifting demographic will continue to influence the
growth of organic agriculture in a keynote presentation at the 2008 Guelph
Organic Conference, January 24-27, University of Guelph.
"Baby-boomers, particularly the 50-plus
boomers, have driven the market for organic food and drink for the past decade
and will continue to do so," says Dr. Foot, Professor of Economics at the
University of Toronto. Boomers, born between 1946 and 1965, remain the largest
group in the population: nearly one out of three Canadians was a baby-boomer in
2006, according to Statistics Canada.
They're more aware of health and well-being,
he says, and as a result have contributed to growth of certified organic
products in this country, tipping over $1 billion in retail sales in 2006.
Boomers, together with their offspring or 'echo boomers' - born between 1980 and
1995, represent a huge potential for the Canadian organic industry, Dr. Foot
says. However this good news comes with a proviso. "The organic industry needs a
clear definition of what 'organic' is or my fear is that it may become a
fragmented industry," says Dr. Foot.
The average consumer finds organic product
claims confusing, he says. Does the word organic mean a form of agriculture that
excludes herbicides, pesticides or antibiotics or does it mean agriculture
produced in sustainable manner? If the definition includes environmental
stewardship, what about the impact of air freighted organic food?
Dr. Foot maintains the organic 'brand' needs
to be clearly defined and defended or it may head into trouble. "The
demographics are all in the organic industry's favour for explosive growth, but
there needs to be ownership of the brand."
Dr. Foot has also published Boom, Bust &
Echo 2000: Profiting from the Demographic Shift in the New Millennium in 1999
and Boom, Bust & Echo: Profiting from the Demographic Shift in the 21st
Century in 2001.
He will be speaking at the 2008 Guelph Organic
Conference on January 26 at Rozanski Hall, University of Guelph, at 9:00 a.m.
Entrance fee is $25 with on-line registration available at www.guelphorganicconf.ca
The Guelph Organic Conference includes a free
table-top trade show, January 26-27, showcasing close to 160 exhibitors in
various related businesses such as organic processors, certifiers, distributors
and groups supporting organic production, many of whom offer samples of new
organic products or products for purchase.
The Guelph Organic Conference is one of North
America's longest-running organic events. Started in 1982 by two international
students studying agriculture at the University of Guelph, the Conference has
grown to be a nexus of organic information for farmers, retailers, wholesalers,
government officials and motivated consumers across the continent. Held annually
in January, the Conference's programming includes international guest speakers,
full-day training programs, introductory workshops and a free organic food
sampling fair.
---
This space is a press release from the Guelph
Organic Conference. GL thinks very highly of this event. Although Hugh Martin,
the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture's organic lead is a key part of the
conference, GL hopes that one year soon the minister and the more generic parts
of the ministry will recognize what , innovative leaders the farmers, retailers,
food processors and organizations are and how much they have achieved in
pioneering the organic movement against all odds. GL's publisher Canadian
Institute for Business and Environment produces Ecological Farming in Ontario
EFO, the magazine of the Ecological Farmers Association of Ontario, a media
sponsor of the event. EFAO is an official sponsor, participates on the
Conference Committee and quite a few EFAO member farmers are
speakers.
****************************************************
LESTER
BROWN
Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute has
been analyzing the links between economics and environment for 40 years. Winner
of many awards such as the Blue Planet award and the United Nations Environment
Awards, Brown is one of the world's environmental titans. Originally a tomato
farmer in New Jersey, he earned a degree in agriculture from Rutgers, lived in
rural India for six months and worked as a international agriculture analyst at
the US Department of Agriculture. After additional degrees, he became advisor to
the Secretary of Agriculture and then Administrator of the International
Agricultural Development Service. In 1969, he left to found the Overseas
Development Council.
In 1974 with support from the Rockefeller
Fund, he founded the Worldwatch Institute which produced annual State of the
World reports from 1984 as well as the more succinct Vital Signs as well as
World Watch magazine. Some called the reports alarmist but they provided
statistics and analysis of threatening environmental trends. A few days ago, GL
heard a bank analyst speak of economic trends and the demand created by 350
million people in the developing world buying to meet desires for a middle class
lifestyle. Lester Brown has been writing about that issue for years in a vivid
way. GL still remembers a chapter in one of his 50 earlier books about what
happens when a billion Chinese eat just one more egg each.
He founded the Earth Policy Institute in 2001.
In a series of books called Plan B, he has described the issues and his visions
for solutions. The newest book Plan 3.0 sets out to reverse trends on four
fronts: climate stabilization, population stabilization, poverty eradication and
restoration of the earth's ecosystems.
****************************************************
GUEST COLUMN:
EXCERPT FROM PART OF CHAPTER 13: THE GREAT MOBILIZATION FROM PLAN B
3.0
by Lester Brown
There are many things we do not know about the
future. But one thing we do know is that business as usual will not continue for
much longer. Massive change is inevitable. Will the change come because we move
quickly to restructure the economy or because we fail to act and civilization
begins to unravel?
Saving civilization will take a massive
mobilization, and at wartime speed. The closest analogy is the belated U.S.
mobilization during World War II. But unlike that chapter in history, in which
one country totally restructured its economy, the Plan B mobilization requires
decisive action on a global scale.
On the climate front, official attention has
now shifted to negotiating a post-Kyoto protocol to reduce carbon emissions. But
this will take years. We need to act now. There is simply not time for years of
negotiations and then more years for ratification of another international
agreement.
...
We know from our analysis of global warming,
from the accelerating deterioration of the economy's ecological supports, and
from our projections of future resource use in China that the western economic
model, the fossil-fuel-based, automobile-centered, throwaway economy, will not
last much longer. We need to build a new economy, one that will be powered by
renewable sources of energy, that will have a diversified transport system, and
that will reuse and recycle everything.
We can describe this new economy in some
detail. The question is how to get from here to there before time runs out. Can
we reach the political tipping points that will enable us to cut carbon
emissions before we reach the ecological tipping points where the melting of the
Himalayan glaciers becomes irreversible? Will we be able to halt the
deforestation of the Amazon before it dries out, becomes vulnerable to fire, and
turns into wasteland?
What if, for example, three years from now
scientists announced that we have waited too long to cut carbon emissions and
that the melting of the Greenland ice sheet is irreversible? How would the
realizations that we are responsble for a coming 7-meter (23-foot) rise in sea
level and hundreds of millions of refugees from rising seas affect us? How would
it affect our sense of self, our sense of who we are?
It could trigger a fracturing of society along
generational lines like the more familiar fracturing of society along racial,
religious, and ethnic lines. How will we respond to our children when they ask,
"How could you do this to us?" How could you leave us facing such chaos?" These
are questions we need to be thinking about now - because if we fail to act
quickly enough, these are precisely the questions we will be asked.
As we have seen, a corporate accounting system
that left costs off the books drove Enron, one of the largest U.S. corporations
into bankruptcy. Unfortunately, our global economic accounting system that also
leaves costs off the books has potentially far more serious
consequences.
The key to building a global economy that can
sustain economic progress is the creation of an honest market, one that tells
the ecological truth. To create an honest market, we need to restructure the tax
system by reducing taxes on work and raising them on various environmentally
destructive activities to incorporate indirect costs into the market
price.
If we can get the market to tell the truth,
then we can avoid being blindsided by a faulty accounting system that leads to
bankruptcy. As Oystein Dahle, former Vice President of Exxon of Norway and the
North Sea, has observed: "Socialism collapsed because it did not allow the
market to tell the economic truth. Capitalism may collapse because it does not
allow the market to tell the ecological truth."
****************************************************
BOOK: THE
CULTURE OF FLUSHING
GL readers may not think they need a book that
describes a history of flushing over the last couple of centuries in the US,
Britain, and Canada, preferring to keep the contents of the flush both out of
sight and mind. However, the new book The Culture of Flushing by Jamie
Benidickson, from the Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa shows why it might be
important to understand the past especially in regard to the ideas people hold
about waste and water. The book explores the primary idea that people have had
and, many still have, that water into which waste is flushed will purify itself.
This idea has resulted in a "perilous fantasy that the planet was created for
human convenience." In the case of Walkerton, Ontario in 2002, where people died
and were seriously ill, the flushing of waste interconnecting to the drinking
water brings the issue up to date.
Many of the legal decisions in the past
related to the "inconvenience" for downstream landowners, industry or mill
operators of waste dumping upstream. Judges concluded that it was inevitable
that rivers must endure inconvenience so the right to pollute was entrenched in
the legal system. It was common to think that streams and rivers that weren't
being used for manufacturing or navigation were essentially going to waste.
Ecological functions for water were not part of the legal framework. Flushing
into water was used originally for all manner of waste, human and animal, for
dumping from sawmill, slaughterhouse, textile mills, and tanning factories. When
the pit privy and cesspools were replaced by sewage pipes, the idea of the
solution to pollution being dilution was adopted fully in law. It was assumed
that the ocean and large lakes such as the Great Lakes were so large that they
would never become polluted. When Thomas C. Keefer was involved in the Montreal
Waterworks in the nineteenth century, he surmised that it could be enlarged as
necessary for future generations so long as in his words, "the St. Lawrence
flows towards the sea" providing a professional opinion, according to
Benidickson that "nature's bounty would be - in terms of water, at least -
costless, unlimited, and eternal."
The book is part of an interdisciplinary
series on the interaction of people with nature in North America. Series general
editor Graeme Whynn wrote the Foreword. He tells of Dr. John Snow mapping
cholera outbreaks in London in 1854 and finding more cases when water was
supplied by Southwark & Vauxhall Water Company which supplied its districts
from the Thames River near the more polluted Battersea area and fewer cases in
districts supplied by the Lambeth Company which drew its water further upstream.
His conclusions were at first regarded with scepticism.
Economics
Trumps Ecosystem
The book explores the priority given in law to
economic output at a higher level than environmental protection. For example,
legislation often gave a license to riparian owners to build dams on as many
non-navigable waters as possible. Sawmills, and gristmills were considered key
to community infrastructure. Mill owners were seen as public benefactors and the
mills, according to one judge, "enhances the value of land, advances its
settlement and promotes general civilization." Fair compensation was to paid to
downstream landowners but the pre-eminence was given to the mills. When judges
assessed reasonable river use, they concerned themselves only with human
effects, not the effects on the water systems themselves. Cumulative effects
were not considered. Over time, even as laws were put in place, exemptions meant
the impact on industry was minimal; penalties were insignificant so legislation
had little deterrent effect.
Conflicts in law between the various
interests, commercial and recreational fishing, other recreation, industry,
navigation, agriculture are described in detail which draws out the underlying
ideas held about nature. In one case, a company providing gas lighting argued
that the citizens benefiting from the street lights gave tacit consent to the
degradation of the river. When industrialists were charged with harming the
waterways, they would highlight the economic benefit and dismiss the death of
fish, "What's the loss of a few fish?". When Ottawa lumbermen lobbied against a
bill which threatened to stop the dumping of sawdust which was blocking
shipping, the industry reminded the legislators of "the size and significance of
their industry, protesting the devasting impact of the legislation and arguing
strongly that annual spring freshets removed sawdust, thereby eliminating any
injury or adverse impact on navigation. "Businesses seeking to use the natural
features tried to match the social benefits arguments. When a company wanted to
use the whole waterfront for access to bathing machines, they argued that
learning to swim was a social benefit: swimmers were more likely to come to the
rescue of mariners in distress.
Benidickson lets the reader draw conclusions
in sly headings of sub-chapters such as "Using, consuming and wasting the
flow"or "Learning to live downstream" but generally doesn't beat one over the
head to learn a lesson. There is lots in the book to lead one to think that
things haven't changed as much as they should have by now. Then and now, sewage
infrastructure is underbuilt and more development allowed than the systems can
handle. This unique broad ranging book provides considerable insight into how
our ideas have led to policies and laws which legalize serious environmental
damage and encourages the reader to "acknowledge the impacts will generally
extend far beyond the realm of inconvenience, and to concede that for badly
underestimating environmental losses, there is a high price to
pay."
Benidickson, Jamie. The Culture of Flushing: a
social and legal history of Sewage. Vancouver, British Columbia: UBC Press,
2007. $85 Hardcover $29.95 trade paperback
http://www.ubcpress.ca/search/title_book.asp?BookID=4561 In Canada, order your copy of The Culture of Flushing
from UTP Distribution In Canada order from: UTP Distribution 5201 Dufferin
Street Toronto, Ontario M3H 5T8 Phone orders: 1 800 565-9523 or 416 667-7791 Fax
orders: 1(800)221-9985 or (416)667-7832 Email: utpbooks{}utpress.utoronto.ca
[replace brackets with symbol at]
****************************************************
DAN JOHNSON
AND CLIMATE CHANGE SCEPTIC: TIM BALL
In April 2006, Tim Ball, one of a group of
well-known climate sceptics, wrote an op-ed piece on global warming at the
request of [sic!] and for publication in the Calgary Herald.
Dan Johnson of the University of Lethbridge
responded with a letter to the editor. Johnson is Professor of Environmental
Science, Canada Research Chair in Sustainable Grassland Ecosystems in the
Department of Geography, University of Lethbridge, Alberta. The newspaper
changed the words Professor of Climatology to climatology professor without his
permission but other than that the letter was printed as written. Ball went to
court saying that a number of the comments were defamatory. Among comments
included dates limiting the number of years Ball could have achieved professor
status and lack of evidence of current research on climate and atmosphere. Ball
stated that the defendants had refused to retract or apologize for the
publication of what he called inaccuracies and defamatory statements. He sought
$250,000 in general damages, specific damages for future loss of income,
punitive and/or aggravated damages in the amount of $75,000, interest, costs and
other relief.
When Johnson wrote the letter, he felt that he
was respectful in drawing attention to the point that Tim Ball claims: that he
was the first Ph.D in climatology in Canada, which Johnson says is an absurd
claim as there were scores of trained climatologists before Ball. What concerned
Johnson was whether the "an authority has experience and new knowledge (and
publications) regarding the subject matter, i.e., atmospheric gases and
climate.This is true in other fields, not just climate science and atmospheric
physics. If someone has a degree in electrical engineering, or a geography
degree with a thesis on the history of water crossings, and then claims to be
the "First P. Eng. in Bridge Design in Canada", watch out. I think that the
engineering associations would look into this." The letter stated, "He has not
done sufficient research, study or publication of articles in the area of
climate and atmosphere to give serious opinions with respect to global warming."
When Johnson was sued, the academic community mainly ignored the lawsuit or
noted it without comment. He said, "The Desmogblog and other blogs such as
Deltoid made many interesting observations on the case."
Response to
Ball's Claims of Defamation
Johnson filed an Affidavit of Records with 180
documents including records from the University of Winnipeg.
Johnson denied that any of the words used in
his letter were defamatory or capable of being interpreted as such as itemized
in Ball's Statement of Claim. Among the facts he presented were:
- Ball's thesis for a degree of Doctor of
Philosophy at Queen Mary College at the University of London in 1983 was
entitled "Climatic change in Central Canada: A preliminary analysis of weather
information from the Hudson's Bay Company Forts at York Factory and Churchill
Factory, 1714-1850. The topic was in historical climatology and
meterology.
- When Ball received his Ph.D, Canada had
numerous individuals with Ph.Ds in climatology, a science generally embraced
within university departments such as geography, physics, earth sciences,
oceanography, hydrology and others. Johnson provides a list of people
beginning with Dr. F. Kenneth Hare who earned his Ph.D in 1950 while studying
arctic climatology (Dept. Geog. U. of Montreal). With his students, Johnson
has creats a website listing early climatologists in Canada.
- Ball was never called a Professor of
Climatology.
- Although Ball claims to have been a Professor
of Climatology for 28 or 32 years depending on various claims, this time
period given his length of time would have included his BA and MA years.
Because sometimes other people can incorrectly list speakers' bios, Johnson
also lists a number of other sources which provided details of Ball's
curriculum vitae which Ball expressly or implicitly approved and authorized.
The faculty names and positions at the University of Winnipeg listed Ball as a
full Professor only from 1988 to 1996 and then as a Professor of Geography not
Climatology. For five years, he was listed as Associate Professor of Geography
(1984-1988) and for years as an Assistant Professor of Geography (1983-84) and
from 1976-1982 first as a Sessional Lecturer of Geography and then as a
Lecturer of Geography. When Ball received a a BA at the University of Winnipeg
in 1970 he was not a member of the faculty at Winnipeg or any other
university. Ball knew that the statements posted on the Friends of Science
website were false.
- Accepted scientific standards set out
disclosure for authors and co-authors to be properly credited. Johnson states
that when listing his publications, Ball has failed to meet this standard as
shown by four scholarly papers some of which fail to list first, second and
other authors.
- Ball has published relatively few arcticles
in peer-reviewed scientific literature and none on whether global warming
caused by greenhouse gases is occurring. Ball has no academic expertise and
qualifications on global warming and greenhouse gases, no peer-review
literature on the physics of the climate system and the modelling of observed
and projected increases in greenhouse gases.
- One measure of the reputation of an
individual academic is the ISI Science Citation which shows Ball has been
cited infrequently. Another measure is academic awards and fellowships in
learned society, Ball has received no prestigious academic awards or
fellowships. Although not fatal to a reputation in global warming and
greenhouse gases, Ball has no physics or mathematical training, has never been
a member of any of the societies one associates with expertise in the field of
global warming science namely The Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic
Society, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union,
the European Geophysical Union or the Canadian Geophysical Union among
others.
- Ball is not involved in any of the four
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC Assessment on Climate Change.
Membership on the panels is a mark of academic expertise and qualification in
climatology.
- Ball is not published in mainstream climate
science journals where global warming research is published, namely Nature,
Science, Journal of Climate, Journal of Geophysical Research, Journal of the
Atmospheric Sciences, Climate Dynamics, Geophysical Research Letters,
Atmosphere-Ocean or Tellus, Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences.
- Ball is not cited in the classic textbooks
used in the field of global warming.
- Although Ball has published in Climatic
Change, an interdisciplinary journal, his articles are not related directly to
global warming, which is a field within climate science.
- The reputation of individual academics within
the scientific community allowing such descriptions as "noted" or "authority"
is also based on the training of graduate students and highly qualified
personnel. The statement of claim states that Ball has done relatively little,
if any such training of young scientists over his career.
- Ball has developed a reputation in the
scientific community but it is as an outspoken critic of the findings of
reputable scientific organizations and the majority of scientists who find the
evidence for human-caused climate change convincing and are therefore urging
action.
- Few of the plaintiff's public statement on
global warming and its causes have been made to the scientific community. Most
of his speaking engagement involve agricultural organizations such as pork
producers or naval associations, seniors' groups, local historical societies
and so on.
- Ball's published research is on historical
climatology of northern Canada, not on global warming or whether human acts or
omissions have contributed to or exacerbated global warming.
- Summaries of meetings, reports to agencies
and symposia papers do not count in the academic community as "scientific
publications"
- Articles in teacher journals are not
publications in the field of climatology.
Johnson also noted that Ball's public
statments show he does not understand the basic physics of atmosphere and
climate, and that Ball is denying that global warming is occurring on the basis
of denial alone and not on the basis of any scientific research. Ball has made
it a regular practice to publish harsh attacks on the credentials and
credibility of scientists concerned about the human influence on global
warming.
Dan Johnson has published extensively in
fields of agriculture, biometeorology, ecology, biogeography and the impacts of
current and predicted climate; he is a Professor of Environmental Science who
lectures on the topic of climate change and global warming in regular University
classes and as a result of his published views, falls within the class of
scientists whom Dr. Ball attacked in his op-ed piece as "having no professional
credentials", but who spread "sensational views on climate change" for reasons
of "politics" and whose "unscientific rhetoric is treated with reverence by a
gullible public who rarely compare their doomsday assertions with real world
climate science."
Johnson's submissions said he had a duty, -
legal, social or moral - to communicate to the readers of the Calgary Herald and
to defend himself and others from Ball's attack. The letter was written without
malice and was fair comment, for example, newspapers ought to report factual
summaries of authors' credentials. There are great gains to be made in science
from conjectures and refutations, but sometimes denial is nothing more than
denial. Johnson stated nothing in his letter to the editor was false or that
Ball had a reputation as a noted climatologist or authority on global warming.
Johnson says that the prior to the publication of the letter which is subject of
the claim, Ball had already become notorious to those who knew of him as climate
change denier who held unorthodox and scientifically unsupportable statements
about climate and weather and continues to be the subject of other articles
including on the Internet which deride his credentials and credibility on the
subject of climate change.
The case has not been pursued.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
GL INTERVIEW
WITH DAN JOHNSON
GL: Why did you get involved in rebutting Tim
Ball's qualifications in the first place?
DJ: The public sometimes make a decision
regarding what to believe, when it appears in opinion pieces, based on the
qualifications and so on that are shown in the author's bio. When these are
often repeated, and appear to be unique or superlative (and highly unlikely, as
in the example of the first PhD in climatology, or a Professor for 28 or 32
years), they need to be clarified. I felt that this was especially true when the
opinion piece was essentially just a attack on the qualifications of others
(including the award-winning and very well informed author of The Weather
Makers). Tim Ball's article was at
GL: How did this effect you?
DJ: I was fortunate to have legal financial
support from James Hoggan and Associates in Vancouver. What they plan to do
after this, I do not know. They run the Desmogblog, which has done a fine job of
exposing the background and truth of climate change news and policies. Jim
Hoggan gave an excellent conference talk on a related issue at the annual
meeting of the Canadian Public Relations Society June 14, 2007 Edmonton, the
invited speaker for the"Diana and Charles Tisdall Luncheon and
Lecture".
GL: Any thoughts you may have in ensuring
honesty in dissemination of scientific information?
DJ: Honesty is ensured in some of the same
ways it is ensured in journalism, banking, etc. But more to the point in this
case, the degree to which a result is to be believed, based on logic and
evidence, is ensured by critical peer-review and publication in scientific
journals of known high standards. We test hypotheses related to small unknown
parts of the puzzles. We use 'theory' to refer to the body of knowledge around a
topic, such as Gravitational Theory, Number Theory, Evolutionary Theory. Someone
ignorant of this meaning might then say that science proceeds from theory to
law, or something like Darwin's theory of evolution remains a theory even
now.
GL: How did you feel when Tim Ball sued you,
and subsequently when hedropped the suit?
DJ: I felt that what I said in my letter to
the editor was factual, supported by the evidence, and fairly
diplomatic.
****************************************************
CALGARY
UNIVERSITY: CONFLICTS IN FUNDING?
Jon Roe, features editor of the University of
Calgary student newspaper, The Gauntlet wrote about the Friends of Science
Society, a group Tim Ball (see above) is associated with. Roe wrote that FSS
opposes Kyoto and doesn't believe human activity causes climate change. The
group went to Ottawa with U of C Dr. Barry Cooper, professor in the political
science department with a video Climate Catastrophe Cancelled. The original
press release and the video included U of C name and Cooper seemed to be
representing the University. There was some confusion about whether Cooper was
given permission to use the University logo and name but these were later
removed. The editor says, "This is just one example of many of the strange
interactions between the U of C and the Friends." Apparently Cooper started the
Science Education Fund at the U of C which was registered at the Calgary
Foundation in 2005 and which supplied the FSS with its fundings. Donors to the
fund are anonymous.
A radio campaign was also funded by the
Science Education Fund; this ad was aired during a federal election and the
editor says focussed on Ontario ridings where Liberal margins were slimmer.
Kevin Grandhi, who manages the DeSmog blog which follows climate sceptics and
industry front groups, has filed a complaint with Elections Canada which decides
on whether third party ads must be registered with the chief electoral officer.
Roe recommends that U of C ought to know where the money which flows though its
charitable foundation goes. Any audit of the Science Education Fund should be
made fully public and university members involved should be held accountable for
any issues.
Roe also says any connection between the U of
C and the Friends should be terminated as this organization is not a research
group but rather, "They pay for people with questionable credentials to be flown
around the country and give talks about subjects they aren't qualified to speak
on and they discretely take money from oil companies to fund their anti-Kyoto,
anti-global warming campaign."
Roe, Jon, Features Editor. Friends is a Four
Letter Word. The Gauntlet - The University of Calgary's Student Newspaper.
November 1, 2007.
****************************************************
INTERFERING
WITH ARMS LENGTH INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Quasi judicial agencies of the Government of
Canada reporting to Parliament were established to ensure that certain parts of
the government such as politicians and bureaucrats have some checks and balances
to their decisions to protect the public interest. Canada's Auditor General
Sheila Fraser was interviewed on CBC Radio's The House on January 19. She was
asked about the firing of the Linda Keen, President and CEO of the Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission by Gary Lunn, Natural Resources Minister. Fraser said,
"It is very important for all of us in those kinds of roles to have the
independence in order to be effective in our roles." The CNSC is a
quasi-judicial administrative tribunal mandated under the Nuclear Safety and
Control Act to provide regulatory oversight of nuclear facilities.
Fraser said she hadn't experienced
interference and GL believes her but cannot help but wonder whether the chill
from the self-renamed 'New' Government of Canada so opposed to scientific
evidence of climate change led to the her firing of the Commissioner for
Environment and Sustainable Development, an event which has still not been fully
explained..
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
AUDIT OF AECL
Auditor General Sheila Fraser spoke of audits
(on The Current see above) of AECL in 2002 and 2007. AECL had made progress on a
plan to manage environmental liability with funding for five years but some
other areas showed little progress:
- replacement of the fifty year old Chalk River
reactor which should have been shut down in 2000 and is still in operation.
The installation can't just be abandoned because there is nuclear waste and
the reactor itself. The reactor has a multitude of purposes aside from the
production of medical isotopes.
- the project for its replacement, the two
Maple reactors is so over budget and eight years behind schedule that Fraser
thinks an independent body needs to assess whether the replacements are even
feasible, whether there is any chance for them and if at all, within what time
frame and price tag.
- AECL has no current corporate plan as it is
required to do to demonstrate accountability.
- The government isn't giving direction to
AECL.
This audit was discussed with the AECL board
on September 5 2007 and then forwarded to the Minister of Natural Resources Gary
Lunn's soon thereafter so the Minister if he had been paying attention ought to
have been aware of problems at the Chalk River facility early on.
AECL as a Crown corporation, which is a
company with the Government of Canada as the only shareholder. It does operate
with some distance from the government but it manages its operations according
to a corporate plan which the government approves annually, doesn't have any
borrowing power and must obtain government approval for certain key decisions
especially those requiring government funding. Any liabilities of AECL are
essentially Canada's liabilities so the government has a high stake. It reports
to Parliament through the Minister of Natural Resources. Funding for the
replacing or refurbishing Chalk River is estimated by AECL to be over $600
million over the next five years or $850 million in the next ten. Over the last
five years, the government has provided $34 million for urgent health, safety,
security and environmental issues.
The Auditor-General Office does not conduct
technical assessment of safety and security of the corporations nuclear
facilities or waste management; this assessment is carried out by the Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission as part of its regulatory mandate.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CHALK RIVER
NUCLEAR REACTOR
Prime Minister Harper misrepresented the issue
as a dispute between two independent (and by inference, two equal) agencies
which ought to be able to reach some kind of consensus instead of bothering the
government.* As one observer has commented that is like saying to the drug
regulators that they ought to reach a consensus with the drug companies, who
insist perhaps even legitimately that delays in drug approvals cost many lives
or that some benefits outweigh the risks. Drug companies are required to
'present substantive scientific evidence of a product's safety, efficacy and
quality as required by the Food and Drugs Act and Regulations.' Health Canada's
drug approval process does not seek to reach consensus with the drug
manufacturer who doesn't wish to provide enough evidence. (At least GL hopes
not.) Regulators tell companies what the law requires of the corporation, some
flexibility may be involved but regulators do not say, "Sure, no problem. You
don't like the law, let's talk about it. If we can't agree, just do as much as
you feel you can (afford, choose to do, get around to, etc), whatever.'
As a Crown corporation with the government
required to approve the annual corporate plan (non-existent if GL is reading the
Auditor-General's report correctly). AECL is not conducting its business, a
highly risky one for health and the environment, well and the government isn't
ensuring that it does. From the testimony of AECL spokespeople at a meeting
with CNSC, the shutdown wasn't planned ahead and CNSC staff weren't supplied
with the required information. One day after its shutdown on November 19, AECL
decided on November 20 to stay shut to finally make the equipment changes which
they told the CNSC they had already done when their license was renewed. CNSC
received only a high-level plan for the shutdown workplan but no details. AECL
apparently didn't think to plan for time delays: they had to order equipment and
parts from around the world which they did after the shutdown began. It seems
they may have skipped telling their major buyer as well.
While Parliamentarians seemed to be under the
impression that the license deficiencies were minor, nothing to worry about,
like a broken tail light on a car, one Conservative blogger wrote, Linda Keen
told Parliament, "The commission had serious concerns regarding the safety of
this 50-year-old nuclear reactor when its licence was ready to expire. When the
commission considered the licence renewal application in the spring of 2006, it
seriously questioned the safety of this NRU. Its decision, effective August 1,
2006, to grant this new licence was based on specific assurances by AECL that
its safety case was complete and that the seven key safety upgrades were
completed. That assurance turned out to be false.
GL does not agree that Parliamentarians made
the right decision by undermining the nuclear safety regulator. However, the
government has an onus, which GL thinks it did not fulfill, to provide
Parliament with correct information especially in critical areas such as nuclear
safety.
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister,
CPC): Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member, I hope, knows, Atomic Energy of Canada
Limited and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission are both agencies completely
independent of the government. I think it is ridiculous that the government can
only resolve an escalating dispute between those two agencies by actually coming
to Parliament and passing a law. (1425)
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
LINDA KEEN:
HOW DO YOU DISPROVE PARTISANSHP
When Linda Keen came to the House of Commons,
she tried to make very clear that the Canadian Nuclear Safety tribunal is
non-partisan, "It is a court of record and it has a long history of regulating
nuclear facilities. It is independent of all influence, be it political,
governmental, private sector, or non-governmental organizations. It has no
economic mandate."
Mr. Ted Menzies (MP Alberta McLeod) asked her
a number of questions about her connections to the former government. She
applied for jobs through the civil service which in Canada except for certain
political appointees in the Prime Minister and cabinet offices continues through
elections. Inevitably many people will have obtained their jobs during the term
of a former government. At one point she said, "Yes, I would like to answer this
question by saying that I am an Albertan. I was born in Alberta. I never
belonged to any political party in my life. I joined the public service in fact
when there was another government in power. I am saying that I am non-partisan.
I serve with good behaviour. I have met every requirement of the Ethics
Commissioner and I do my work on a non-partisan basis and I have no political
affiliation."
The questions inevitably lead the reader to
think Menzies was showing up Keen as a woman in a powerful job which she got
only through political patronage, that she wouldn't get any such job in her own
right because of her qualifications and skill (and GL observes guts). Even Don
Martin of the National Post, normally a friend to conservative thinking, was
critical, 'What about the unprovoked attack on on Canadian Nuclear Safety
Commission chair Linda Keen as a Liberal-appointed hack? It was a particularly
egregious character assault when it turned out the Conservative's patronage pick
for Atomic Energy Canada president, one Michael Burns, quit to become the fall
guy in the Chalk River shutdown fiasco.' GL isn't in favour of name calling but
some around here have been heard muttering innovative ways of combining the
names Harper and Putin, an expression illustrative of what columnist James
Travis calls a growing trend towards 'democracy deficit' of this government.
At 10:00 p.m. on January 15 the night before
she was to appear before a Parliamentary Committee (the Standing Committee of
Natural Resources), Linda Keen received a letter from the Privy Council Office
indicating that the government adopted an Order in Council terminating her
designation as President of the Commission, effective immediately. The letter
indicated that she was to remain a full-time permanent member of the Commission.
It was her intention to appear before the Committee but did not do
so.
Even critics of the Commission such as Norm
Rubin, Nuclear Director of Energy Probe who ironically has said CNSC was too
cozy with the nuclear industry was dismayed at this over-reach by the
government.
From an environmental point of view, GL finds
the lack of willingness to listen to advice from anybody (with a few
very-politically loaded exceptions) without first trying to determine their
level of loyalty to the Conservative Party or more probably to Harper himself is
a consistent and serious problem of this government and harmful to the
environment. How does one lone civil servant prove her professionalism to a
government who discounts the evidence of 2000 Nobel-prize winning experts of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CHIEF NUCLEAR
PHYSICIST STEPHEN HARPER BOARDS THE GOOD SHIP TITANIC
Prime Minister Harper assured the House of
Commons just before Parliamentarians chose to overrule the safety regulator
requirement that AECL meet its license conditions, "There will be no nuclear
accident."* This is an expression of an unfortunate mindset which he and some of
his ministers have shown not for the first time in addressing other
environmental issues such as climate change.
GL was thinking that the Prime Minister might
need education on the meaning of accident prevention and has a couple of
suggestions. One is viewing all the horrific ads of Ontario Workplace Safety and
Insurance Board. The theme is "There really are no accidents." The storylines
explore the idea that "Everybody has rights, roles and responsibilities that can
help prevent all workplace injuries, illnesses and fatalities."
The other is an exhibit about the Titanic that
was at the The Chicago Museum of Science and Industry a few years ago. Bruce
Ismay succeeded in creating the world's most luxurious ship with palm courts and
Parisian style cafes. But he thought that the Titanic's lifeboat decks were too
cluttered and ordered the removal of 28 lifeboats. When the ship sank, he found
space on one.
The Titanic left on its maiden voyage from
Southampton, England on April 10, 1912. The Titanic was said to be the safest
ship ever made but predictions can be wrong. The Museum says, "Errors in
construction, design and naval judgement, including a captain who cancelled the
mandatory lifeboat drill, led to her unfathomable sinking." On April 14, Captain
Smith and the 2nd Officer Charles Lightoller agreed at 9:00 PM that they will
see anything large enough to damage the ship in time to take action. Another
ship the Californian comes upon the ice field and stopped to wait out the night;
the Californian sent warnings to the Titanic but the Titanic's operator was
backlogged and sent back a reply, "Shut up, shut up I'm busy." The crew on the
Titanic's lookout had no binoculars because of confusion with the change of crew
at Southhampton.. The Titanic has hit the fastest speed it had ever
travelled.. When the lookout finally saw the iceberg, the action of the officer
is after all too late. The iceberg scrapes 300 feet of the Titanicm sinking the
safest ship ever with 2,200 people onboard but lifeboats for only half of them.
The lifeboats were thought to be needed only if the Titanic rescued survivors of
other sinking ships. The heavy losses of one thousand five hundred twenty-two
passengers and crew were said to be due to insufficient lifeboats and inadequate
training in their use. And GL thinks a mindset inclined towards a belief in no
risk.
*Excerpt from House of Commons Debate.
Wednesday December 12, 2007.
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister,
CPC): Mr. Speaker, there will be no nuclear accident. What there will be is a
growing crisis in the medical system in Canada and around the world if the
Liberal Party continues to support the regulator obstructing this reactor from
coming back online. [GL notes that the Canadian Medical Association estimates
patients exceeding medically necessary wait times average 85 days (counting only
when the patient has seen a specialist) to get an MRI scan in the normal
situation with little expression of federal outrage and sense of
crisis.]
(just past 1420)
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
KEITH MARTIN
CRAP EMBARRASSES DION
Liberal MP (Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca) Keith
Martin is a medical doctor and his party's critic for the Canadian International
Development Agency. His work for the environment has been well known and was
officially recognized in 2001 when he was entered into the Rio Honour Roll of
the Sierra Club of Canada, then presided over by Elizabeth May.
Now, however, Martin is taking more than a
little crap for opposing sewage treatment for Victoria, BC. Currently, like some
developing country nation, Victoria dumps its untreated sewage into the
ocean.
While Liberal leader Stephane Dion insists
that it is well past time for Victoria to treat its sewage, Martin says the call
for sewage treatment is merely an emotional reaction and that dumping sewage
into the ocean is environmentally sound (and cheap). Martin says that a lot of
dumping has nothing to do with the sewage but includes solid waste and sediment
containing carcinogens and heavy metals which the treatment will not remove.
Martin is in deep doo doo for signing a letter opposing sewage treatment that
was printed in Victoria's Times Colonist newspaper.
The mandated sewage treatment will cost $1.1
billion, of which the province has committed to pay a third. In a referendum,
Victoria residents have already turned down sewage treatment because they feel
it will cost hundreds of dollars extra in property taxes for each of the next 50
years and be a blight on the landscape. In 2006, the BC government ordered the
municipality to implement sewage treatment or face regulation compelling an
impossibly expensive clean up of the outfall site.
Denise Savoie, former Victoria City Councillor
and winner of the 2005 Gallon Environment Letter EcoCouncillor of the Year
award, celebrated her second year as the MP for Victoria on January 23, the
first woman in that position. Unlike Martin, Savoie favours the building of the
sewage treatment facility but wants to keep it a public facility rather than
being privatized.
Paid
subscribers see links to original documents and references here.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copyright © Canadian Institute for Business
and the Environment
119 Concession 6 Rd Fisherville ON N0A 1GO
Canada. Fisherville & Toronto
All rights reserved. The Gallon Environment
Letter (GL for short) presents information for general interest and does not
endorse products, companies or practices. Information including articles,
letters and guest columns may be from sources expressing opinions not shared by
the Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment. Readers must verify all
information for themselves before acting on it. Advertising or sponsorship of
one or more issues consistent with sustainable development goals is welcome and
identified as separate from editorial content.Subscriptions for organizations
$184 + GST = $193.20 includes monthly Sustainable Technologies and Services
Supplement STSS ; for individuals (non-organizational emails and paid with
non-org funds please-does not include monthly STSS): $30 includes GST. Issues
about fifteen times a year with supplements. http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx