Air Quality, Environmental Impacts, Fracking, Public Health, Public lands, Water quality

Federal Fracking Ban Re-introduced: Protect Our Public Lands Act, H.R. 1902

Press release, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
[Editor: Food & Water Watch supports the bill with a petition here.  “We know that this is just a first step — that in this political climate it seems like it’s nearly impossible to move things forward — but together we can build momentum to protect the lands that are such an important part of our country.”  – RS]

On Earth Day Pocan and Schakowsky Introduce Strongest Federal Fracking Ban in the U.S.

April 22, 2015

WASHINGTON, DC — On Earth Day, U.S. Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), members of the Safe Climate Caucus, introduced the Protect Our Public Lands Act, H.R. 1902. The legislation is the strongest anti-fracking bill introduced in Congress to date and would ban fracking on public lands.

“Our national parks, forests and public lands are some of our most treasured places and need to be protected for future generations,” said Rep. Mark Pocan. “It is clear fracking has a detrimental impact on the environment and there are serious safety concerns associated with these type of wells. Until we fully understand the effects, the only way to avoid these risks is to halt fracking entirely. We should not allow short-term economic gain to harm our public lands, damage our communities or endanger workers.”

“Today is Earth Day – a time to renew our commitment to protecting the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the planet we all call home,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky. ‘Our public lands have been preserved and protected by the federal government for over one hundred years.  We owe it to future generations to maintain their natural beauty and rich biodiversity.  I believe the only way to do that is to enact the Protect Our Public Lands Act, and I will continue to fight to see that happen.”

“Our public lands are a shared national heritage, and shouldn’t be polluted, destroyed, and fracked to enrich the oil and gas industry,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. “Ironically, the President is speaking in the Everglades today, a unique and fragile ecosystem that is threatened by nearby fracking on public land. Congress must follow Congressman Pocan and Congresswoman Schakowsky’s bold leadership and ban fracking on these lands, so that future generations can enjoy these special places.”

Mounting evidence shows that fracking threatens our air, water and public health. To make matters worse, reports have shown that existing fracking wells on public lands aren’t being adequately inspected, creating even more potential for disastrous accidents. Right now, about 90 percent of federally managed lands are available for oil and gas leasing, while only 10 percent are reserved for conservation, recreation, wildlife and cultural heritage.

The Protect our Public Lands Act, H.R. 1902 prohibits fracking, the use of fracking fluid, and acidization for the extraction of oil and gas on public lands for any lease issued, renewed, or readjusted. The legislation is endorsed by the Food and Water Watch, the American Sustainable Business Council, Environment America, Friends of the Earth, Center for Biological Diversity, Progressive Democrats of America.

Climate Change, Fossil fuel divestment

Tufts students stage sit-in to urge fossil fuel divestment

Repost from The Boston Globe
[Editor: For more on fossil fuel divestment, see 350.org and GoFossilFree.org.  See also The Daily Mail: “Hydrogen fuel breakthrough: Clean power generated WITHOUT relying on fossil fuels” – RS]

Tufts students stage sit-in to urge fossil fuel divestment

By Aneri Pattani, April 22, 2015
Students protested Tufts University’s fossil fuel investment at the president’s office. David L Ryan/Globe staff

Tufts University students and alumni entered the university president’s office Wednesday morning and began a sit-in, vowing to persist until the administration commits to fossil fuel divestment.

The protest began just before 9 a.m. when members of the student group Tufts Climate Action entered president Anthony Monaco’s office in Ballou Hall, said Shana Gallagher, chairwoman of the student group.

Gallagher, 20, said the group wants the university to commit to divesting its endowment from fossil fuel companies over a five-year period and freeze all new investments immediately.

“We are planning on staying here until we are given some commitments,” she said. “The president is out of town, but we will be right here waiting for him when he gets back.”

The sit-in at Tufts is the latest in a series of protests staged at Boston-area schools recently to urge fossil fuel divestment. Last week, a group of Harvard students and their supporters rallied in Harvard Yard.

Tufts issued a statement Wednesday saying it recognizes the diversity of opinions on the subject of divestment and welcomes continued discussion that is thoughtful and respectful.

“Tufts University is proud of its students’ active involvement in a wide range of issues,” the statement said. “However, it is important that the debate about divestment not overshadow the progress Tufts is making in support of environmental stewardship.”

The university said it has launched a new sustainability investment fund, has begun construction of a high-efficiency central energy plant, and is making new investments in recycling and waste-reduction programs.

For the 33 students, alumni, and local supporters involved in the sit-in, as well as numerous other students who participated in a divestment rally at noon, the efforts need to go further, Gallagher said.

“We are hoping to reopen that line of communication and make sure we can be working with the administration on the issue of fossil fuels,” she said.

Tufts executive vice president Patricia Campbell met with some members of the student group Wednesday morning after the sit-in began, Gallagher said. Another round of negotiations is scheduled for Thursday morning.

“This was the step we felt we had to take to initiate these negotiations,” Gallagher said.

The university determined last year that divestment “would have an immediate adverse impact on the educational experience at Tufts,” and it “would not be prudent to expose the university to that kind of risk at this time,” the university said in the statement.

The university said a group of students, trustees, faculty, and staff concluded that “divestment would likely result in a significant reduction in operating funds.”

“We will continue to examine the feasibility of divestment in the future,” the statement said.

Ben Weilerstein, 21, a member of Tufts Climate Action, said he thought the protest was a necessary step to bring attention to the role of fossil fuels in causing climate change.

“This is important because Tufts has millions of dollars invested in an industry that is destroying communities across the world,” he said.

Federal Regulation (U.S.), Positive Train Control, Rail Safety

Positive Train Control Safety Act (S. 1006) – to grant shorter extensions

Repost from Progressive Railroading

Sens. Schumer, Blumenthal, Feinstein, Boxer and Gillibrand propose shorter extension of PTC deadline

4/21/15

Responding to recent fatal passenger train crashes and crude-oil train derailments, U.S. Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) yesterday announced new legislation that would require railroads to install positive train control (PTC) technology by 2018.

The senators said their Positive Train Control Safety Act (S. 1006) also would require railroads to report on their PTC implementation status and require trains carrying crude oil to run on tracks installed with PTC.

The bill would extend the federal government’s PTC deadline by three years by allowing one-year extensions, on a case-by-case basis, until 2018. The current deadline is Dec. 31. Recently, other legislation has been introduced to extend the deadline by five years.

The senators said they believe their legislation is necessary “to ensure railroads are moving forward swiftly” to install the crash-prevention technology. The bill would also improve rail inspection practices, in addition to enhancing safety at grade crossings and work zones in response to reports of lax inspection and oversight and numerous fatal accidents, they said.

“The Positive Train Control Safety Act will require railroads, including both passenger and freight trains, to implement PTC by 2018 and the legislation makes sure railroads are transparent about their efforts and requires regular status updates on implementation,” said Schumer.

Also sponsoring the bill are Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

“This bill will hold railroads’ feet to the fire and ensure they’re moving forward to install PTC, receiving deadline extensions only on a case-by-case basis and year-by-year, and only if factual evidence shows a valid, credible need for more time,” Blumenthal said.

Alberta Canada, Economy, Electoral politics, Oil prices, Tar sands crude

Alberta, the Home of Tar Sands, has “Increasing Income Inequality”

Repost from Oil Change International

Alberta, the Home of the Tar Sands, Has “Increasing Income Inequality”

By Andy Rowell, April 21, 2015

As the Albertan election heats up, the worsening economy – in large part caused by the plunge in oil prices – is taking centre stage in the province’s election campaign which comes to a head in early May.

The early election comes as Alberta, the home of the tar sands, is feeling the full force of the declining oil price, with some 8,000 job losses expected in the energy sector.

The province’s government is grappling with a multi-billion deficit and is scrambling to reduce the reliance of the province on the tar sands industry.

“The premise for calling the election … was that we need a structural shift that is going to take the economy off of oil so that the proportion of the budget that’s accounted for by oil and gas resources goes down,” Bruce Cameron, a local pollster told the Globe and Mail.

Not only is the tar sands industry responsible for this boom and bust jobs cycle, it is also contributing to a widening gap between rich and poor.

A new analysis, published yesterday by the Parkland Institute, entitled From Gap to Chasm: Alberta’s Increasing Income Inequality, concluded that “the gap between the rich and the poor in Alberta is the widest in the country”.

The bottom line is that over the last couple of decades, as the tar sands industry has grown, so has the gap between those earning huge petro-inflated wages and those not.

The Institute, which is an Alberta research network situated within the Faculty of Arts at the University of Alberta, found that the disparity between those Albertans at the top of the income ladder and those at the bottom has been growing faster than in any other province in Canada.

Back in 1990, Alberta was roughly comparable to Canadian national averages of income inequality levels. However by 2011, the most recent year for which the data is available, it was the worst province.

The author of the new factsheet analysis, who is a public finance economist, Greg Flanagan said “The data show clearly that Alberta is now the most unequal province in Canada, and that the gap between those at the top and those at the bottom widened in Alberta over the past 20 years twice as much as the national average.”

Flanagan added that “Equally worrisome is the fact that because Alberta is the only province without a progressive taxation system, Alberta saw the least improvement in income equality after taxes.”

The rich have certainly got much richer, with the share of total income enjoyed by the top 10% of income earners in Alberta climbing by almost 30% between 1992 and 2007.

Meanwhile, the share of total income that went to the bottom half of earners in the province dropped over the same period, and has flatlined at or below 16% of total income since 2000.

“All the parties in this election should be presenting plans to address what is clearly a serious inequality problem in Alberta, and one that is getting worse, not better,” says Flanagan, who called on a significant shift to progressive taxation in Alberta to help reverse what he called “this troubling trend”.

For safe and healthy communities…