Archive for the ‘Environment’ Category

By Redempto D Anda, IPS

Depending on who one talks to, Mt Mantalingahan is either a treasure trove of untapped minerals lying underneath the earth’s crust, or a biodiversity hotspot that is home to some of the worlds rarest and threatened animals.

It is both, which is why Mt Mantalingahan, some 150 kilometres south of this capital city of the Philippines’ central Palawan province, is the scene of conflict between communities and environmental activists on one hand, and mining companies on the other.

Palawan accounts for bulk of the country’s reserves of nickel ore, valued at 300 billion U.S. dollars, official data show. But cashing on this is easier said than done, because it would involve compromising large areas of old- growth forests and the ecological benefits derived from them.

Geologist Jose Antonio Socrates calls Mt Mantalingahan “perhaps the country’s largest deposit of nickel ore”, which explains why major mining companies have stepped up plans and others have filed for mining claims before the regulatory agencies in the capital Manila.

But for Danny Balete, one of the country’s top mammal scientists, Mantalingahan is “the centre of the Philippines’ mammalian endemism and biodiversity” and home of the ‘Tau’t Bato’ (stone people) tribe, whose number is estimated to be down to less than 500 individuals.

Balete discovered a new species of mountain shrew in Mt Mantalingahan, and other scientists collected new species of plants, including a stunning white orchid with golden lip petals.

Mantalingahan’s importance as the home to a number of short-range endemic species, including the soft-furred mountain rat, which had not been seen in decades, and critically endangered species like the Palawan peacock pheasant and the Palawan cockatoo, has also been noted by the Alliance for Zero Extinction, an initiative of 52 multinational biodiversity organisations.

“There is so much still to learn about Mt Mantalingahan, so much to discover not just for science but more importantly for society who stands to benefit from this wealth of biological resources,” Balete said, referring to potential medicinal breakthroughs from bioprospecting.

Balete added that the 2007 survey his group did in Mantalingahan for Conservation International underlined that it is an “important component of the country’s overall biodiversity”.

In June 2009, former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo declared Mantalingahan a national park and classified it as a ‘protected landscape’ covering 120,457 hectares.

Against this backdrop, the conflict between mining interests and environmentalists is heating up – and involving local officials, laws and communities. Buoyed by the global demand for nickel and a government policy to revive mining, several mining firms plan to set up operations around Mantalingahan. MacroAsia, the flagship of one of the country’s most prominent business conglomerates, is applying for local permits to operate a 25-year government lease it got in the town of Brooke’s Point that partly overlaps with the protected area.

Two other companies – Ipilan Nickel Mining Corp and Lebach Mining Corp – are in earlier stages of project development, trying to get all local endorsements needed to proceed.

Standing in their way are civil society groups that are challenging their every move – from securing endorsements from communities and provincial regulatory bodies, to filing legal action to stop mining projects.

The residents of Ipilan village who oppose mining, led by village captain Job Lagrada, have vowed to put up a human barricade if the government allows the projects to proceed. They believe that mining will destroy their farms and watersheds.

One group, the Palawan Youth Force, has embarked on a signature campaign on the social networking site Facebook to convince the Philippines’ new president, Benigno Aquino III, to prevent new mining activity in the province.

A lawyers’ organisation, the Environmental Legal Assistance Centre, has hauled to court most provincial officials for endorsing a mining project in the Narra municipality, in alleged violation of a special national law protecting Palawan’s remaining old-growth forests.

One contentious issue about Mantalingahan is whether mining should be allowed in “core zone” areas with old- growth forests, which are protected under the Strategic Environmental Plan (SEP) law for Palawan. An initial review by the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), the provincial regulatory agency, showed that all except 91 hectares of the area leased to MacroAsia are “core and restricted zones” protected under the SEP zoning system.

But MacroAsia maintains that its legal right to utilise its leased area has precedence over local laws, including the proclamation of Mantalingahan as a protected area.

The former vice mayor of Brooke’s Point, Jean Feliciano, claims that the majority of municipal officials who back the MacroAsia project plan to change local laws and reclassify old-growth forest areas under the local zoning plan, in order to accommodate the mining project. “There is now an effort to revise the comprehensive land use plan,” Feliciano said.

Feliciano blames MacroAsia for being behind the “harassment” of anti-mining groups in Brooke’s Point, citing the case of the chief village official of Ipilan who is facing a slew of administrative cases related to his opposition to the project. The official, Job Lagrada, had stopped the mining firm from conducting surveys.

In an interview, MacroAsia’s vice president for operations, Ramon Santos, declined to comment on most of the criticism against the company, saying “we have formally responded to those issues raised by the PCSD”.

He said MacroAsia is not directly involved in the move to change the land use plan in order to accommodate its nickel ore project. “It is the concern of the local government unit, which is mandated to prepare their own comprehensive land use plan,” he said.

Santos added: “We have a good relationship with the community, with the local government. We have the all the endorsements – although, in this world you cannot please everybody.”

But Feliciano questions the validity of the signatures MarcoAsia got to comply with the mandatory local requirements. “They only got the signatures of the people that favoured them. Those who were against the project, they did not bother to consult. That’s not what social acceptability is all about,” Feliciano pointed out.

Lagrada, who has been suspended from his duties while the administrative complaint by Macroasia is pending, remains firm in his anti-mining stance. “They (mining companies) might have bought off most officials to endorse mining, and those people will benefit financially, while we suffer the environmental consequences. If this project goes ahead, we will put up a human barricade to oppose it,” he said in Filipino.

* This story is part of a series of features on biodiversity by IPS, CGIAR/Bioversity International, IFEJ and UNEP/CBD, members of Communicators for Sustainable Development (http://www.complusalliance.org).

by Stephen Lendman

Drilling means spilling, hundreds of annual incidents, most small, unreported, yet their cumulative effect is devastating, what the industry and nightly news won’t mention or explain.

On February 25, 2009, Environmental Research web.org writer Kate Ravilious did, headlining “Small unreported oil spills add up to major damage,” saying:

Big spills make headlines while small ones “often go unnoticed and unreported. But these little slicks could be just as damaging to the environment as large spills, according to new research findings.”

Barcelona, Spain Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya Professors Jose Redondo and Alexei Platonov developed a way to spot spills from satellite images. They show that “small oil spills are very common, and when added together they become comparable to large” ones. Their frequency makes them damaging, yet little about them is reported.

Studying European waters alone, they determined that major spills happen every few years, large ones three or four times a year, and smaller ones virtually daily. Extrapolated globally over time amounts to a major environmental problem, compounded by many small incidents and natural seepage – as much as 14 million barrels a year globally offshore.

“For example, it seems that there are four to five times more spills (large and small) in East Asia than in European Coastal waters,” and Middle East ones experience “significantly more spills.” Most often, negligence to cut costs is why.

According to Redondo and Platonov, “the cumulative effect and toxic dose (of small spills) is the same as a large spill, and will be detected in the long run,” as well as their environmental damage, slowly destroying the health of global waters.

Charles Clusen, Natural Resources Defense Council National Parks and Alaska Projects director believes up to 500 spills happen annually and will increase with greater production, plus natural seeps adding more. According to former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration (NOAA) supervisory researcher Jeff Short:

“Once you have a spill, you are pretty much screwed. That’s because oil spreads on water at a rate of one-half a football field per second. Recovery can take decades.”

Another expert says offshore spills cause more damage than a terrorist attack. They’re unacceptable risks – reason enough to ban all shallow and deep water drilling and strictly regulate the rest. Besides daily spills, the Gulf of Mexico alone has experienced over 500 oil rig fires since 2006, most never reported, the latest on September 2. More on it below.

Exhibit A in Alaska was the Prince William Sound Exxon-Valdez incident. After over 20 years of natural weathering, it remains an environmental and human catastrophe, and it was minor compared to BP’s greatest ever environmental crime.

On land, drilling is hazardous, but offshore requires complex technology, greatly increasing the risks. According to UC Berkeley Engineering Professor Robert Bea:

“This is a pretty frigging complex system. You’ve got equipment and steel strung out over a long piece of geography starting at the surface and terminating at 18,000 (or more) feet below the sea surface. So it has many potential weak points,” compounded by negligence to cut costs. “Just as Katrina’s storm surge damage found weaknesses in those piles of dirt – the levees – gas likes to find weakness in anything we connect to that source.”

Drilling is a dirty, dangerous business. The long-term harm greatly outweighs the benefits. Besides spills and other accidents, the ecological damage is immense, contaminating waters and shorelines. Drilling releases toxic muds, containing poisonous heavy metals, including mercury, cadmium and lead, as well as dangerous amounts of arsenic, benzene and radioactive minerals. According to the EPA:

Drilling “may leave behind waste containing concentrations of naturally-occurring radioactive material (NORM) from the surrounding soils and rocks. Once exposed or concentrated by human activity, (it) becomes Technologically-Enhanced NORM or TENORM. Radioactive materials are not necessarily present in the soils at every well or drilling site. However, in some areas of the country, such as the upper Midwest and Gulf Coast states, the soils are more likely to contain radioactive material.”

“Radioactive wastes from oil and gas drilling take the form of produced water, drilling mud, sludge, slimes, or evaporation ponds and pits. It can also concentrate in the mineral scales that form in pipes (pipe scale), storage tanks, or other extraction equipment.”

Naturally occurring radioactive materials include radium and radon gas, potent carcinogens that accumulate in water, wildlife, plants and vegetables, and take 1,600 years to degrade. Combined with other toxins (after decades of offshore drilling) has left vast areas of global waters dangerously toxic – why nothing in them should be eaten.

The Latest Reason to Ban All Offshore Drilling

On September 2, operating 100 miles south of Louisiana’s Vermilion Bay in shallow water (several hundred feet deep), a rig operated by Mariner Energy, Inc. (a Houston-based independent oil and gas producer) exploded and caught fire, a company press release saying:

The company “confirms that a fire has occurred at a production platform located on Vermilion Block 380, approximately 100 miles from the Louisiana coast. All 13 members of the crew have been evacuated and safely accounted for. No injuries have been reported. In an initial flyover, no hydrocarbon spill was reported.”

False. Workers told rescuers they heard a blast, saw a fire, and had to jump into Gulf waters to be safe. One injury was reported. The Coast Guard said a mile-long, hundred foot wide oil sheen was seen near the site, then later about-faced saying no oil was spotted. It’s there and spreading, but there’s no indication how much or whether the release was contained. First reported at 9:20AM, the fire was extinguished about six hours later.

Mariner’s rig is a production, not drilling platform like BP’s. At year end 2009, it produced 47% oil and 53% natural gas. The company has interests in nearly 350 offshore leases, including over 80 in deep water down to 7,100 feet. More than 110 are in development.

According to the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement (BOE, formerly the Mineral Management Service – MMS), federal authorities cited Mariner and its related operations for 10 Gulf accidents in the past four years. They included platform fires, oil spills and a blowout. In a 2008 incident, one employee sustained serious injuries. In early 2010, the company was fined $55,000 for safety violations.

Consider its history. As a former Enron unit, it faced bankruptcy, saved only by private equity investors buying it at fire sale prices. On April 15, Apache Corp., America’s largest independent oil and gas producer, announced plans to buy Mariner, calling the deal “a strategic step and a natural extension into the deepwater Gulf….provid(ing) an exciting new platform for growth….” The agreement is still on, Apache saying it’s monitoring developments closely but hopes to complete its acquisition in a matter of weeks.

Final Comments

Despite offshore drilling dangers; the industry’s history of violations, accidents, and spills, some major like BP’s; and the growing contamination of waters and coastal areas, the rage to drill is unabated, few in Congress willing to challenge Big Oil’s muscle.

After the Mariner explosion, however, environmental groups are flexing theirs, wanting offshore drilling banned, Greenpeace USA’s oceans campaign director, John Hocevar, saying:

“How many times are we going to gamble with lives, economies and ecosystems? It’s time we learn from our mistakes and go beyond oil,” for sure stop drilling offshore to get it.

Jackie Savitz, senior campaign director for the environmental group Oceana agrees, saying:

“We think all offshore oil drilling should be banned, but not just the deepwater drilling. Even oil spills in shallow water are bad. It doesn’t have to be in deep water to be a disaster.”

Environment America’s Mike Gravitz said Obama “need(s) no further wake-up call to permanently ban new drilling.”

In a September 2 press release, the Center for Biological Diversity said:

“Today’s explosion….is the latest in a string of accidents in recent decades illustrating the dangers of offshore drilling in shallow (or deep) waters.” It called for expanding the moratorium, explaining that “Offshore drilling is an inherently unsafe, toxic activity that, every day, puts people and the environment at risk.” Only one solution can work – a total ban.

After the BP incident, a coalition of 14 environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity and Greenpeace, wrote Obama, urging a permanent moratorium, saying:

“In response to the BP drilling disaster, we specifically urge you to establish a presidential drilling moratorium which would permanently restore coastal protections for areas currently not leased for offshore oil and gas drilling, and cancel exploratory drilling permits for the Beaufort and Chukchi seas. Furthermore, we urge you to use the full force of your office to push for a comprehensive bill that cuts oil consumption, curbs global warming pollution and shifts us towards clean energy.”

The group also called for a “top to bottom review of worker safety, blowout avoidance technology, and oil spill clean up plans for operations in the Outer Continental Shelf.”

Others believe only a total ban can work, shifting America’s fossil fuel addiction to alternative, clean sources. The choice is simple – either a healthy, safe environment or one contaminated and destroyed. There may be little time left to decide.

by Stephen Lendman

For months, US media reports distorted and lied about its severity, running cover for BP and the Obama administration, now practically avoiding the crisis altogether as it worsens. An August 20 Inter Press Service report is revealing, quoting Biloxi, MS fisherman Danny Ross saying hypoxia (depleted oxygen) is driving horseshoe crabs, stingrays, flounder, dolphins, and other sea life “out of the water” to escape. Another area fisherman, David Wallis said he’s “seen crabs crawling out of the water in the middle of the day.”

Other reports cite strange marine life behavior, sighted near the surface when they normally stay well submerged. Alabama fisherman Stan Fournier said in 40 years of work, he’s never seen anything like it. “It looks like all the sea life is trying to get out of the water,” unable to breathe in their normal habitat, what US media reports won’t touch, instead hyping success, saying BP’s well capped and most oil dissolved when, in fact, it won’t degrade for decades, remaining a lethal cocktail combined with dispersants, killing wildlife and poisoning anyone eating it, assuring a coming epidemic of cancers and other diseases. 

On August 19, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) senior scientist Bill Lehr, in testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, retracted his earlier claim about most oil dispersed and dissolved. He now says “I would say most of that is still in the environment,” as much as 90%, only 6% burned and 4% skimmed, the rest contaminating a large part of the Gulf, spreading, and devastating wildlife.

In addition, on August 19, the journal Science published a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) study, confirming a giant oil plume floating about 1,200 meters below the surface – 35 km-long (22 miles), two km wide, and 200 meters thick. Persisting “for months without substantial biodegradation,” it poses a serious threat to sea life, one of the article’s writers, Dr. Chris Reddy, saying, “At this point, we know the plume exists, and we know more about its potential biological activity in the future” and harm it can cause.

It’ll be years before the full extent of damage is known. However, it’s already extensive and extremely dangerous, containing 50 micrograms per liter of “a group of particularly toxic petroleum compounds,” 6 – 7% of it a deadly benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene cocktail – released from BP’s Macondo well, the evidence clearly showing it according to research team head Richard Camilli.

He expects the plume to spread and biodegrade very slowly in cold waters. In addition, other independent researchers discovered other even larger plumes. University of Georgia Marine Sciences Professor Samantha (Mandy) B. Joye said the WHOI plume “doesn’t hold a candle” to one her team found in May. Nonetheless, BP and Obama officials signaled an all-clear, denying their existence and the catastrophic disaster, out of sight and mind instead of dealing with it responsibly.

It’s why on August 23, the Union of Concerned Scientists alerted members and supporters to “Help end America’s dangerous addiction to oil,” saying for decades it’s warned about the US’s “misguided energy and transportation policies (instead of) promoting innovative solutions to reduce our dependence on oil. (The Gulf disaster) is a painful reminder of the work” left to be done and urgency of doing it.

On August 20, Kieran Suckling, Center for Biological Diversity Executive Director headlined his press release, “Gulf of Mexico Still in Crisis Four Months After BP Explosion: Center for Biological Diversity Tour Finds Oiled Beaches, Water and Wildlife….Drilling Policy Reforms Still Too Weak, Too Late,” saying:

The Center’s team saw “firsthand how oil is still killing wildlife and fouling beaches and marshes. This crisis is far from over.” Grand Isle, LA beaches were contaminated with oil, liquid surface pools and more mixed with sand in hardened mats along the water’s edge.

“Some beaches appear fine from a distance but are actually sitting atop massive amounts of oil, which bubbled to the surface when the team walked across the sand. Digging into (it) with rubber gloves,” oil was found six inches below the surface. Crabs and birds are covered with it as they cross beaches or marsh land. “Fish and sea turtles are forced to swim through oil on the surface and below,” looking for food. “In short, (the Gulf) is still an oily mess despite rosy assertions” by BP and Obama officials, claiming most oil is gone. They know damn well it’s there to stay, poisoning everything it touches.

The Center’s survey supports independent scientists saying most remains, fouling beaches, waters, marshes and wildlife. Working for reform and serious remediation, Center officials filed seven lawsuits against BP and government regulators, including “the largest Clean Water Act suit in history,” seeking $19 billion in fines from BP. More on their likely resolution below.

Firsthand Reports from the Gulf

Reporting from the area, investigative journalist Dahr Jamail calls Grand Isle, LA’s condition “post-apocalytic,” spotting “tar balls that bob lazily underwater, amidst sand ripples in the shallows….Oil-soaked marsh abounds….the island smell(ing) like a gas station. Noxious fumes infiltrate my nose, causing me to cough. Piles of oiled oysters rest on the tide line.”

Tar balls are everywhere. “In some places, there are literally huge mats of fresh tar….The scene is apocalyptic….It is one of the more disgusting, vile scenes I’ve even seen….All we can do is take photos. The stench is overpowering. I gag. My eyes water from the burning chemicals….I feel dizzy.” The entire Gulf Coast has been raped and destroyed. Official coverup is criminal.

Only time will assess the full damage on humans and wildlife. However, the toll already is devastating, the Obama administration complicit with BP, culpable for a crime they want suppressed, ignored and forgotten, what will affect the lives of millions perhaps forever.

According to Florida State University ocean scientist Ian MacDonald: “The (disaster’s) imprint will be there in the Gulf of Mexico for the rest of my life. It is not gone,” and won’t ever “go away quickly,” warning of a potential tipping point beyond which wildlife and the ecosystem won’t recover, the crossed Rubicon after which return no longer is possible, a shocking assessment perhaps already true.

JAMA Reports Direct Threats to Human Health

In its August 16 edition, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) writers Drs. Gina M. Solomon and Sarah Janssen headlined, “Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill,” saying “it (and dispersants pose) direct threats to human health from inhalation or dermal contact,” besides harming seafood and mental health.

Solomon and Janssen explained that crude oil’s main components are “aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons.” Containing volatile organic compounds (including benezene, toluene and xylene), they “can cause respiratory irritation and central nervous system (CNS) depression.”

Benzene also causes leukemia, and toluene “is a recognized teratogen (causing embryo malformation) at high doses.” Naphthalene and other higher molecular weight chemicals are “reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans….”

Released hydrogen sulfide gas, nonvolatile polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals from oil “can contaminate the food chain. Hydrogen sulfide gas is neurotoxic and has been linked to both acute and chronic CNS (central nervous system) effects. PAHs include mutagens and probable carcinogens. Burning oil generates particulate matter, which is associated with cardiac and respiratory symptoms and premature mortality.”

Massive dispersants use greatly exacerbates the problem. They contain toxic detergents, surfactants and petroleum distillates, including known respiratory irritants like 2-butoxyethanol, propylene glycol, and sulfonic acid salts.

As a result, area residents and cleanup workers experienced headaches, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, coughs, respiratory distress, chest pain, and other symptoms – warning signs of potentially greater future health problems.

“Skin contact with oil and dispersants causes defatting, resulting in dermatitis and secondary skin infections. Some individuals may develop a dermal hypersensitivity reaction, erythema (injured or irritated skin), edema, burning sensations, or a follicular rash.”

Potential long-term health risks are high, wildlife contamination making anyone eating Gulf seafood vulnerable. “Community residents should not fish” in oil-contaminated areas, nor should federal, state or local officials allow them.

Some Final Comments

On August 20, New York Times writer Ian Urbina headlined, “BP Settlements Likely to Shield Top Defendants,” saying:

“People and businesses seeking a lump-sum settlement from BP’s $20 billion oil spill compensation fund will most likely have to waive their right to sue not only BP, but also all the other major defendants involved with the spill, according to internal documents from the lawyers handling the fund.”

In other words, the fix is in, Obama and BP officials conspiring to let responsible parties off the hook, settlement terms designed to deny victims just compensation and for many, perhaps most, none at all, given the strict guidelines of eligibility required.

Claims czar Kenneth Feinberg is a notorious “fixer,” mandated to save BP, Transocean, Halliburton, and blowout preventer maker Cameron International potentially tens of billions in liabilities, strong-arming victims to waive their right to sue in return for amounts too meager to matter.

According to Urbina, the dilemma for those suing is deciding between “years of litigation (or) accept(ing) the (offered) settlement….before the full (extent of) damage” is known. Most important is that “those who cannot demonstrate damages caused by the direct impact of oil on beaches and fisheries will be ineligible for money.”

For example, small businesses, not located directly on affected beaches, experiencing sharp revenue drops “will not be able to receive compensation….” in violation of the federal Oil Pollution Act that excludes geographical limitations. The same holds for area residents living away from the shoreline.

Property owners who’ve seen sharp valuations drops, will also be cheated. So will cleanup workers and area residents later contracting diseases, mental illness, lost income, or other harmful effects.

As point man, Feinberg will deny, obstruct, and let criminal defendants off the hook, then (on BP’s payroll) be handsomely paid for his services, the same ones he performed earlier for Wall Street banks, Agent Orange producers, asbestos manufacturers, and Dalkon Shield maker AH Robins as well as against 9/11 victims.

Only corporate interests matter, not people whose lives they destroy, Obama officials doing nothing to help them – instead being complicit partners in the greatest ever environmental crime, whitewashing it by giving the all-clear, declaring “mission accomplished,” and protecting corporate criminals at all costs.