Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Animas River Disaster Leaves Mineshafts to Clean #AnimasRiver #colorado #epa - http://clapway.com/2015/08/27/animas-river-mineshafts123/

On August 5th, 2015, contractors from the Environmental Protection Agency were cleaning polluted water out of southwestern Colorado’s long-abandoned Gold King mine shaft, when disaster struck: part of the mine collapsed under the water’s pressure, releasing over 3 million gallons of foul yellow sludge into the Animas River, staining the waterway for hundreds of miles.


Animas River Disaster Leaves Mineshafts to Clean - Clapway


What Exactly Was The E.P.A. Trying To Do?


It was just another day on the job. Contractors from the E.P.A. were attempting to drain a deposit of contaminated water from the mineshaft near Silverton, Colorado, as they have been slowly doing with thousands of mineshafts across the west.


Their task is the result of 150 years of shoddy mining regulations. During the 1859 Colorado Gold Rush and the decades following, prospectors would essentially blow holes in the sides of mountains, scrape out a bunch of rocks, and dump the less valuable stuff in a trench or valley somewhere. By 1872, people at least had to prove there were some metals in the places they were blasting. By 1891, mines were required to have a small amount of ventilation; by 1910, the US had over 2,000 mining deaths every year, prompting periodic, modest increases in health regulations. But the first environmental regulations didn’t kick in until 1948 with the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which in 1972 became the Clean Water Act, enforced by the newly-formed Environmental Protection Agency.


But for the mining industry, the Clean Water Act was too little too late. Ambitious, blast-happy prospectors had been dumping their waste for over a century. Mine shafts, mountainsides, landfills, riverbeds, and every mountainous nook and cranny imaginable had already been filled with rocks and metals dug from deep underground. Whether or not they were dumped directly into existing bodies of water was irrelevant; mining waste pollutes the snow that melts off of it, the rain that falls on it, and the new bodies of water miners create by digging holes everywhere.


So it was just another day, and the E.P.A. was draining one of these deep holes from a 19th century mine now filled with water. But they underestimated the water pressure of the deposit and accidentally triggered a collapse, sending 3 million gallons of sick yellow goop into the aptly named Cement Creek, from which it flowed into the Animas River and formed a long, golden snake that sent the West into an uproar.


Foul Yellow Sludge: We Reveal It All


So what makes this water so bad? After all, it’s natural; it comes from the earth, right?


Human beings—and all living organisms—are adapted to drinking water with trace amounts of almost every mineral our planet’s surface. In fact, we would die without doing so. Those minerals enter our water by colliding and interacting with the earth’s crust, which is composed of—you guessed it—minerals.


But when that water is interacting with heavier metals dug up from deep beneath the earth’s surface, and especially when that water chills with these rocks for years on end as it does in mineshafts, would-be healthy minerals reach poisonous levels, and rarer metals that our bodies are not adapted to enter the water. Organisms benefit from the casual encounters of rain and rock, but long-term relationships between water and mine-waste prove toxic.


As such, the great yellow plume that came billowing down the Animas River contained poisonous levels of many minerals that would be healthy in trace amounts—iron, nickel, zinc, copper, cobalt, manganese, molybdenum, aluminum, and arsenic—and it also contained high levels of minerals that are toxic even in tiny doses: barium, cadmium, mercury, and lead. The water produced a foul smell, and was found to be as acidic as black coffee.


Ironically, the yellow color came from perhaps the healthiest mineral of the bunch: iron.


Three weeks after the disaster, these minerals and their color and stench are finally being washed out of the Animas River. But they will live on in the river’s fish, particularly trout: while few died, all now contain high concentrations of these deadly metals for years to come. It remains to be seen whether the lasting effects on the fishes’ health will outweigh the relief that no humans will be catching them again for quite some time—except to diagnose their health.


When You Turn the Animas River Into Mustard, People Get Upset


The Animas River was already a struggling ecosystem, having suffered from minor mine pollution, urbanization, and increasing demand for decades. Still, the Gold King catastrophe was jarring for those live in the region.


As the Animas River has slowly gone back to pre-spill levels, people’s fury has only escalated. Several towns and the Navajo Nation are demanding compensation from the Federal government as well as a thorough investigation into the E.P.A.’s handling of the incident, preferably by an agency other than the E.P.A.


For three weeks, towns in Colorado and New Mexico had their drinking water shut off. Farmers and ranchers were ordered to stop using their well water and irrigation ditches. The region’s recreational water-sport economy—kayaking, white-water rafting, fishing, etc.—suffered enormous losses during what is usually its most profitable time of year. Fishing tourism in the Animas River will suffer a lasting loss.


Despite the E.P.A.’s insistence that the Animas River is clean once again, the Navajo Nation has vowed not to use it for at least a year. Their suit against the E.P.A. asks the agency to compensate them for devastating the river that has long been their lifeline.


The Gold King Mine Is Just the Beginning


The Gold King is just one of thousands of abandoned mineshafts filled with contaminated water. In Colorado, 230 of these have been slowly secreting their water into major waterways for years, and across the West, 40% of river headwaters are polluted by acid mine runoff. Even without the added pressure of cleaning up the Animas River mess and answering people’s demands, the E.P.A. has its work set out for it.


The problem is, for such an pressing task, cleaning polluted water out of old mineshafts is an extremely difficult, dangerous, and expensive job.


There has long been controversy over an E.P.A. rule that holds anyone liable for contaminating a river, even an environmental organization who accidentally pollutes a waterway while trying to clean it. This rule has been criticized for scaring off well-meaning organizations and slowing down the cleaning process.


In some ways, the recent disaster has validated this rule by demonstrating the extreme difficulty and high stakes of cleaning these mines. At the same time, it has completely eroded much public trust in the E.P.A. Unhappy parties will demand that the E.P.A. is held as accountable as it would hold an outside organization, and they will likely continue petitioning for organizations to be allowed to clean mines without risking liability—since the E.P.A.’s cleaning of them is clearly a liability in and of itself.


Whatever happens, cleaning the West’s mineshafts will be a slow but steady process, since these particularly polluting types of mines are no longer being dug. But as Western droughts rage on and water supplies grow thinner and thinner, keeping that water clean will only grow more urgent.



Don’t take nature for granted. Let’s do our part to preserve it for generations to come:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD63kwQuZ2I



Animas River Disaster Leaves Mineshafts to Clean

Saturday, August 8, 2015

Major Pollution: Massive Mine Waste Spill in Animas River - http://clapway.com/2015/08/08/pollution-in-animas-river-101/

AN UNFORTUNATE EVENT


Everyday, the news has to break a series of unfortunate events, some of which inevitably concern pollution. Today’s news is no different.

When the news first broke out amidst Colorado mainstream media about the mine waste spill in the Animas River in Colorado, reaching all the way to Farmington, New Mexico, everyone was wondering who did this and why natural environments must be so polluted.

Coverage by Colorado news outlets like the Denver Post, reported that around the mine waste spill was had one million gallons of wastewater spill into the Animas River from an abandoned mine. The result was the once clean waters now run an orange tinge.


TRACKING POLLUTION AS IT SPREADS


The question regarding who caused the mine spill was answered when in the same outlet source the EPA acknowledged the spill was caused by their mistakes. How did this major pollution happen?

The EPA had been using some heavy equipment to examine some pollutants at the Gold King Mine when it inadvertently let loose the contamination into the river. Officials are now examining the river to see the effects it will have on the ecosystem due to the variety of contaminants in the mine waste spill.

Shortly after the accident, which occurred in the morning at 10:30am, the EPA later released a statement late Wednesday (around 10:40pm) about how they will address the mine waste spill and what to do about it. You can find the EPA’s regulations about reporting oil spills and other such hazardous spills here.


THE AFTERMATH OF POLLUTION


The orange tinge is the visible result of the mine waste spill caused by the EPA that is now flowing into other water systems that flow as far as Farmington, NM. Samples are being taken from the contaminated water sources for further concerns.


However, not all are swayed into relief efforts by demonstrations thus far. In a press release by the Center of Biological Diversity dated to yesterday, the issue of federal officials downplaying the concern of the mine waste spill in the Anima River is brought to full bore.


The river contaminated flows into other river systems such as the San Juan River that goes into New Mexico and Utah. The San Juan River is home to several species of endangered fish and birds that are already suffering from the pollution of present contaminants. The downplaying raised troublesome doubts and questions about what the long term effects of contamination will be.


In the press release, the center will be taking actions. The actions include inspecting the EPA’s efforts in accordance to various laws in place involving endangered species, hazardous contamination and spills.



 


TAKE ADVANTAGE OF POLLUTION-FREE REFRESHING WATER WHILE YOU CAN




Major Pollution: Massive Mine Waste Spill in Animas River

Thursday, July 23, 2015

#EPA seems #surrounded on all side by #opinions. - http://clapway.com/2015/07/23/does-the-epas-new-wotus-rule-too-far-or-not-far-enough-255/

Industries across the nation are in an uproar over the new WOTUS rule, claiming the EPA is overreaching their power by making the coverage provided by it too widespread.


Industries and farmers across the nation, as well as 29 of the 50 states filed lawsuits against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for their work in publishing the “Waters of the United States,” or WOTUS rule On June 29. Lawsuits against the EPA were on the grounds that the EPA went too far in implementing new rules that would be potentially crippling for the nation’s industry and agriculture.


Ironically, the EPA is now under fire for just the opposite–a coalition of conservation groups filed a lawsuit against the agency yesterday, this time for not going far enough.


THE WOTUS RULE


The EPA’s new WOTUS rule adds much more range to the kinds of bodies of water protected by the Clean Water Act. Whereas the Clean Water Act already covered lakes, rivers, and year-round wetlands, it was not clear as to whether bodies of water that only appear during certain seasons, such as streams that dry up during select parts of the year. By adding coverage and protection to these seasonal bodies of water, the newly-defined WOTUS rule would allow the EPA to regulate any industry and farming taking place in or around these waters, under the authority of the Clean Water Act.


TOO FAR


Industries across the nation are in an uproar over the new WOTUS rule, claiming the EPA is overreaching their power by making the coverage provided by it too widespread. House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R- Texas) was quick to criticize the vague language used by the EPA in order to grant more coverage, pointing to the word “drizzle” as a word used in the WOTUS rule in a section dealing with protection coverage.


The more the Clean Water Act covers, the more eligible the EPA is to perform inspections on industries built on or near these bodies of water, potentially complicating business across the nation. Heartland Institute’s H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D , commented, “Farmers, ranchers, developers, industry, and individual property owners would now be subject to the EPA’s arbitrary, unsound, and often incomprehensible regulatory system. It cannot be trusted.”


Farmers have also taken up issue with the new rule, as the Clean Water Act requires permits for developing into covered waters–an issue many would have to face with the implementation of the WOTUS rule–which covers many small and seasonal bodies of water that farmers commonly use for agricultural purposes.


NOT FAR ENOUGH


A coalition of conservatory groups including the Waterkeeper Alliance, the Center for Food Safety, the Turtle Island Restoration Network, and the Center for Biological Diversity as well as others sued the EPA yesterday in a lawsuit filed for exactly opposite reasons. While farmers, industries, and state officials complain that the restrictions set by the WOTUS rule are too strong, the coalition claims them to be too weak, as they believe the exemptions included cater to the needs of industries too much, placing hundreds of endangered species at risk.


The coalition expressed their views in a recent statement: “Endangered salmon and sturgeon on both coasts, California red-legged frogs, and bog turtles are among the many species that depend on clean, unpolluted water and will be harmed by the exemptions created by this rule.” They have also expressed how the exemptions included by the EPA for industry and agriculture regulation will undoubtedly lead to increased pollution in bodies of water across the US.



 


Always a push and pull with environmental action. Enjoy nature in your own home with Atmoph:




Does the EPA"s New WOTUS Rule Go Too Far or Not Far Enough?

Wednesday, July 8, 2015

Polar Bears Will Soon Disappear From Earth Forever - http://clapway.com/2015/07/08/polar-bears-will-soon-disappear-from-earth-forever987/

Our White Ice-Loving Friends are Disappearing


The concerns about the ever rising sea levels, melting ice caps, and constant warnings about global warming making their way into everyday news and our lives, it is no surprise that bears inhabiting the arctic regions are now suffering as a result. The extent of the damage done to the Polar Bears may mean they’ll soon be gone in a scant few years.


In the Blink of an Eye, the Polar Bears Will Be Gone


No one wants to see our white furry friends go. That’s why the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has responded to the declining population of the polar bears by drafting up a conservation plan to save them, or at least minimize their losses. The draft of the conservation effort can be found here on which it lists that number of polar bears that are present across the northern arctic tundra is lower than what one would expect. The number concerns many who are keeping an eye on the population.

The one factor that accounts for most of the reason for their declining population is a changing, warming climate, and all its complications and consequences, including rising sea levels and the melting of the polar ice caps. Under the final rule on the ESA listing of the Polar Bear back in 2008 as a threatened species, it states that the species is on the brink of becoming an endangered species should the loss of habitat continue.


What exactly is the plan to save them?


With efforts to severely limit the amount of greenhouse gases that is emitted by the U.S every year, efforts to save the polar bear are underway. However, this is not happening without some rebuking and chiding of the EPA on their power plant rule, for reasons relating to the standing foundations of government powers by the Constitution that the rule overstepped. The clock is ticking now to see how successful efforts to save the polar bears turn out.



Want to prevent headphone cable tie-ups and get amazing quality sound? Try the Rokit Boost SwageU Bluetooth headphones!




Polar Bears Will Soon Disappear From Earth Forever

Thursday, May 28, 2015

US: Epa Unveils Plan to Stop Pesticides From Harming Honeybees - http://clapway.com/2015/05/28/us-epa-unveils-plan-to-stop-pesticides-from-harming-honeybees-123/

Honeybees are essential to the survival of the ecosystem, and when the honeybees start to die it’s said that it’s a sign of the beginning of the end. Without these tiny yellow pests flowers would be pollinated, and the plant life on earth would slowly die out. It comes as no surprise that an organization like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), would seek to protect these valuable insects from harmful insecticides used by farmers.


On Thursday the EPA proposed that while Honeybees are near farms that have plants in bloom, the farms cannot use any type of insecticide during the time that the bees are feeding.


US: Epa Unveils Plan to Stop Pesticides From Harming Honeybees - Clapway


For Farmers this may big changes to the way they farm


A ban on pesticides means that farmers will by law not be allowed to use any type of pesticide when they are within a specific radius of the at risk honeybees. Thousands of different chemicals that farmers typically use, will all be off limits if the EPA is granted permission to enforce their policy. This is not the first time that the EPA has placed caveats on what farmers must do to prevent harm to the insects. In 2013 the EPA required specific labels for pesticides in order to prevent the use of more harmful choice in pesticide according to Jim Jones Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, “Multiple factors play a role in bee colony declines, including pesticides. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking action to protect bees from pesticide exposure, and these label changes will further our efforts.”


Not the first time that efforts have been made to protect the honeybees


For years the EPA has been making strides to protect these creatures, because they of all organizations understand how critical the insects are to the ecosystem. In 2014 the EPA awarded 500 million dollars to Penn State, Louisiana State, and the University of Vermont to find new ways to keep the Bees safe. Jim Jones explained the justification for spending so much to keep honeybees safe, “These collaborative projects can provide innovative solutions to reduce pesticide risks to pollinators and crops. Initiatives such as these will encourage others to adopt promising technologies and practices across the nation to reduce pesticide risk while maximizing crop production and protecting public health.”


The EPA understands the concerns that farmers have about reducing pesticide use, but more importantly know that the risk of losing swaths of honeybees trumps any other concerns.



US: Epa Unveils Plan to Stop Pesticides From Harming Honeybees