Press Release from Riverkeeper New York [Editor: This from our contact in Albany: “New York State rescinds the Global expansion NegDec (aka, FONSI) and declares the application incomplete. Cites air issues, spill response issues, potential “significant adverse impacts on the environment”, and EPA concerns. Letter from the State attached.” – RS]
Riverkeeper Responds to Decision Regarding Albany Oil Terminal Expansion
For Immediate Release: May 21, 2015
Contact: Leah Rae, Riverkeeper
914-478-4501, ext. 238
Riverkeeper applauds the decision by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation regarding the proposed expansion of Global Companies’ rail-to-barge transfer terminal at in Albany, which would facilitate the transport of heavy “tar sands” crude oil. Riverkeeper calls on the state to follow through on what they’ve begun today and promptly issue a “positive declaration” requiring an environmental impact statement.
“It is good for New York State that the DEC came to a proper decision in one of the most important environmental matters facing the state. We look forward to participating with the state on a full public safety and environmental review that is robust and protective of our communities and our waterways.”
The shipment of tar sands crude oil would pose a whole new level of risk to the Hudson River. In the event of a spill, the toxic, sinking crude would mix into the water column and be unrecoverable.
A lawsuit filed by Riverkeeper and other groups in June 2014 challenged the DEC’s decision not to require an environmental impact statement. Riverkeeper had reminded the DEC that state law required an environmental impact statement on the proposal due to the significant environmental and public safety impacts, ranging from air pollutants to the increased risk of fire and explosion in downtown Albany. The DEC’s own Environmental Justice Policy requires that nearby communities be consulted and informed about proposals that may affect them so that those communities can be meaningfully involved in their review.
Health Professionals Call for Denial of Oil-By-Rail Terminal Permits in Oregon and Washington
By Regna Merritt, May 11, 2015
For Immediate Release
Contacts:
Laura Skelton, Executive Director WA Physicians for Social Responsibility, Laura@wpsr.org o: 206.547.2630
Regna Merritt, Campaign Director, OR Physicians for Social Responsibility, Regna@oregonpsr.org c: 971.235.7643
Mark Glyde, Resource Media, Mark@resource-media.org c: 206.227.4346
Bruce Amundson, MD, President, WA Physicians for Social Responsibility, jobrucebaa@frontier.com h: 206.542.5690
Seattle, WA – Nearly 300 doctors, nurses and other health professionals today called on Washington Governor Jay Inslee and Oregon Governor Kate Brown to deny permits for proposed new and expanded oil-by-rail facilities. The position statement based on peer-reviewed medical literature examines a broad range of public health and safety risks including air and water pollution, oil spills and clean-up, delayed emergency response, and storage tank fires and explosions. The statement to the Governors has been signed by 289 health professionals so far.
“There is simply no way that the health and safety of residents of these communities can be assured, given the number of dangerous oil trains heading our way and the scale of these massive storage and shipping facilities so close to residential areas,” said Bruce Amundson, a family physician and President of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR).
If all the proposed new and expanded oil terminals were built, the Northwest could see an increase in oil train traffic coming into the region from current levels of about 19 per week to more than 130 trains per week. Up to 1.5 miles long each, oil trains can block street crossings for 10 minutes or more.
“In trauma care, outcomes drastically worsen for seriously injured patients who need an emergency operation and don’t receive treatment within the ‘golden hour,’ said Pat O’Herron, MD, who practices acute care surgery in Salem, Oregon. “Ten minutes can cost lives or save lives.”
Oil trains are also a significant source of air pollution. Diesel pollution is linked to increased cancer rates particularly in the lung and breast, heart attack and stroke, and contributes 78% of the risk for cancer in airborne toxics in the Puget Sound area. In children, diesel pollution is linked to higher rates of neurodevelopmental disorders, impaired lung development, and increased frequency and severity of asthma.
“The expected surge in oil train traffic will add to already high levels of airborne toxin exposure experienced by many communities along rail lines,” said Mark Vossler, a cardiologist and Chairman of the Department of Medicine at Evergreen Hospital in Kirkland, WA.
The position statement also looks in-depth at the health impacts of water contamination from oil spills. Crude oil is a complex mixture of thousands of chemical compounds, many of them harmful to human health. Often overlooked is the toxicity of oil dispersants used to clean up spills.
“We have a history of oil spills in our Northwest waters and every day brings the risk of another one,” said Mary Margaret Thomas, a registered nurse who assisted with the clean-up of the BP Deepwater Horizon spill. “I saw first-hand the grave effects of oil dispersants including nausea and vomiting, seizures and memory loss, undiagnosed skin rashes and lesions, and hormonal changes.”
Many ingredients in oil dispersant products listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are known or suspected toxins which can affect every organ system of the human body.
Findings of the 2014 Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study from the WA State Dept. of Ecology reflect an overall lack of adequate training, resources, design and regulatory oversight to properly respond to an oil spill given current terminal proposals.
EPA Cites Bakersfield Oil Train Terminal for Clean Air Act Violations
Federal agency says California oil train terminal is major air pollution source, permit is invalid without significant environmental review
Contact: Maggie Caldwell, Earthjustice, 415-217-2084, mcaldwell@earthjustice.org, Monday, May 4, 2015
The newly opened Bakersfield Crude Terminal in Taft which the EPA has found in violation of the Clean Air Act. | Elizabeth Forsyth / Earthjustice
Taft, CA —The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has cited the Bakersfield Crude Terminal for 10 violations of the Clean Air Act, declaring the California crude-by-rail facility a major air pollution source that should have been subjected to rigorous environmental review during the permitting process. The federal agency found that the terminal’s permit is invalid and that the facility lacks required pollution controls and emissions offsets, and that it is in violation of the Clean Air Act’s public notice and environmental review requirements.
In January, Earthjustice and Communities for a Better Environment sued the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which issued the invalid permit, over the permitting process for the facility’s expansion— a process that was conducted without public review. Earthjustice is representing the Association of Irritated Residents (AIR), ForestEthics, Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity.
A public records request revealed communications between San Joaquin Valley Air District officials and the project manager for the terminal that included advice from the officials about how the project could avoid public noticing and pollution controls. The Air District approved the massive expansion in a piece-meal permitting process that allowed one of the largest crude oil operations in California to expand largely out of public scrutiny.
“The EPA’s announcement declares the Air District’s permit a sham and that the Bakersfield terminal is operating illegally,” said Elizabeth Forsyth, Earthjustice attorney. “Air District officials went out of their way to exclude the public from the process and speed the approval through, ignoring the environmental review required by state and federal law. We applaud EPA for stepping in and enforcing the Clean Air Act.”
EPA’s action could subject the terminal to serious Clean Air Act fines, and should force the Bakersfield Crude Terminal to undergo the major source permitting required by the Clean Air Act.
“The EPA stepped in to protect California from this crude-by-rail facility’s dangerous air pollution,” said Vera Pardee, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Federal intervention is urgently needed because the air district and Kern County officials have utterly failed to safeguard public health and the environment. They’re turning a blind eye to air pollution and environmental risks such as catastrophic explosions linked to these massive trains full of volatile crude.”
“EPA’s notice of violation should serve as a wake up call to local authorities around the country who help polluters when they should be protecting public health,” said Matt Krogh, ForestEthics Extreme Oil Campaign Director. “Oil trains threaten 25 million Americans who live in the blast zone, plus millions more who live downwind of a refinery, downstream of where an oil train crosses a river, or in the Bakken and tar sands producing regions of North Dakota and Alberta, Canada.”
“In Kern County, with the worst air in the nation, the air district has harmed the health of the public by intentionally allowing this facility to violate the Clean Air Act,” said Tom Frantz, with Association of Irritated Residents.
“Given the increased pollution and hazards from refining and transporting a lower quality crude, there is immediate need for a moratorium that halts new permits and construction of extreme oil infrastructure, not the opposite fast track permitting process that Air District officials put this massive crude by rail terminal on – and in secret,” said Roger Lin, attorney with Communities for a Better Environment.
“The US Environmental Protection Agency’s announcement today is a significant step forward for Bakersfield and Kern County residents who bear all the burdens of volatile, accident-prone crude by rail transport and none of the benefits,” said Gordon Nipp Bakersfield resident and Sierra Club Kern-Kaweah Chapter Vice Chairman. “This terminal wreaks havoc on our region’s already compromised air quality and our communities now fear the risk of exploding trains.”
The agency also weighed in on the issue of vapor pressure of Bakken crude, declaring it unreasonable to underestimate the vapor pressure when permitting a crude-by-rail site and requiring vigorous monitoring and reporting of what crude oil is actually shipped. One way many of these facilities get around major source permitting is by cherry-picking the volatility of the crude oil being shipped, estimating the vapor pressure on the low end of the spectrum, which would keep emissions of volatile organic compounds under the threshold for triggering Clean Air Act review.
In addition to emitting volatile organic compounds from the off-loading of crude oil, the facility endangers Bakersfield and other communities in California by increasing the amount of explosive crude oil transported by rail through the state. There have been multiple incidents of train derailments and explosions across the nation and in Canada. An oil train that derailed in Lac Megantic, Quebec, destroyed most of the town center, burning more than 30 buildings to the ground and killing 47 people. Just this year, there have been four derailments and explosions in West Virginia, Illinois and Ontario involving oil trains.
California governor orders aggressive greenhouse gas cuts by 2030
By Rory Carroll, Apr 29, 2015 11:28pm IST
California Governor Jerry Brown looks on during a news conference at the State Capitol in Sacramento, California March 19, 2015. REUTERS/Max Whittaker
(Reuters) – California Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order on Wednesday to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent by 2030, a move he said was necessary to combat the growing threat of climate change.
The targeted reduction was tied to 1990 levels and is “the most aggressive benchmark enacted by any government in North America to reduce dangerous carbon emissions,” Brown said in a statement.
California operates the nation’s largest carbon cap and trade system. The state sets an overall limit on carbon emissions and allows businesses to hand in tradeable permits to meet their obligations.
Achieving the new target will require reductions from sectors including industry, agriculture, energy and state and local governments, Brown said.
“I’ve set a very high bar, but it’s a bar we must meet,” Brown told a carbon market conference in downtown Los Angeles on Wednesday.
Brown said the new target will position California as a leader in combating climate change in the United States and internationally.
Brown said he has spoken to leaders in Oregon, Washington and Northeastern states about collaborating with California to cut their output of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Those states could potentially link to California’s carbon market in future years.
He said he has had similar discussions with leaders in the Canadian provinces of Quebec, British Columbia and Ontario, as well as in Germany, China and Mexico.
Quebec is already linked to the California market. Leaders in Ontario this month signaled their intention to join the program.
“This will be a local policy but it will be globally focused,” Brown told reporters on the sidelines of the conference.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the news and encouraged other states and cities around the world to also take action, U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said.
“California’s bold commitment to tackling climate change is a strong example to states and regions all over the world that they can join their national governments in taking ownership of this critical issue and in showing leadership,” Haq said.
The plan for how California will achieve the 2030 target will be hammered out over the next year by the California Air Resources Board (ARB), which oversees the cap-and-trade program.
“With this bold action by the governor, California extends its leadership role and joins the community of states and nations that are committed to slash carbon pollution through 2030 and beyond,” said Mary Nichols, chair of the ARB.
(Reporting by Rory Carroll in Los Angeles and Laila Kearney in New York; Editing by Susan Heavey and David Gregorio)
