When methane began bubbling out of kitchen taps near a gas drilling site in PA last winter, a state regulator described the problem as "an anomaly." But the same official was simultaneously investigating similar cases in over a dozen homes across the state.
In fact, methane related to the natural gas industry has contaminated water wells in at least seven Pennsylvania counties since 2004 and is common enough that the state hired a full-time inspector dedicated to the issue in 2006. In one case, methane was detected in water sampled over 15 square miles. In another, a methane leak led to an explosion that killed a couple and their 17-month-old grandson.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
One Billion People Go Hungry - Food, Funds in Short Supply
A billion people around the world are going hungry every day, but the world's response to their urgent need for food is flagging, so critical food assistance is already being cut, the head of the world's largest humanitarian organization is warning.
World Food Programme Executive Director Josette Sheeran said Thursday the UN agency aims to feed 108 million hungry people in 74 countries this year, but is facing "dangerous and unprecedented" funding shortfalls.
"Our budget for this year of assessed and approved needs is US$6.7 billion and we expect from our projections and working with government to come in at 3.7 billion," Sheeran said at a press briefing in Washington ahead of meetings at the White House.
The World Food Programme is funded entirely through voluntary contributions, most of which come from governments.
"We are actively cutting $3 billion of our program, which means a reduction in rations and programs throughout the world, including those to the world's most vulnerable people," said Sheeran, a former U.S. under secretary for economic, business, and agricultural affairs in the State Department during the administration of President George W. Bush.
In Bangladesh, home to some of the world's hungriest people, a WFP programme set up to give meals to 300,000 children in school will now reach only 70,000, Sheeran said
In Guatemala, funding shortfalls could mean that in August, around 100,000 children under the age of five, and 50,000 pregnant and lactating women are going to lose their supply of Vitacereal – a nutritious blend of maize, soy and micronutrients.
In Kenya, hunger is on the rise following the failure of the long-rains season in marginal agricultural lowlands and pastoral areas. WFP will run short of cereals in August, and the 3.2 million Kenyans living in arid and semi-arid areas who had been receiving a normal ration will now face reductions in the amount of food they are given.
In Zimbabwe, food insecurity persists despite improvements in agricultural production and a more liberal import policy this year, according to a report issued in June by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Food Programme. The report estimates that 2.8 million people will face food shortages in the coming year.
Sheeran said the world is "rightly" looking for sustainable solutions to the world hunger problem and she commended the Group of Eight industrialized democracies for their $20 billion pledge to boost global food security made earlier this month at the G8 meeting in Italy.
She said the pledge, which focused on agricultural development, showed that the industrialized world "takes the food security issue seriously."
The G8 countries committed to a goal of mobilizing $20 billion over three years "through a coordinated, comprehensive strategy focused on sustainable agriculture development, while keeping a strong commitment to ensure adequate emergency food aid assistance," the government leaders said in their declaration.
While welcoming the G8 pledge, Sheeran said the world needs to recognize the urgent need to buy food for distribution to the people suffering from hunger and poverty, whose number now exceeds one billion.
"The problem is not all about agricultural yields," Sheeran said. "The challenge is people cannot get access to food – whether because of poor infrastructure or because they can't afford it."
Food security has many environmental dimensions, the G8 leaders recognized. "Effective food security actions must be coupled with adaptation and mitigation measures in relation to climate change, sustainable management of water, land, soil and other natural resources, including the protection of biodiversity," they declared.
The food crisis is not over in the developing world, WFP analysis confirms. In fact, the situation is more alarming in many countries than it was a year ago as the impact of high food prices is compounded by the recent financial crisis, Sheeran said.
New data from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization suggests food prices are higher today than a year ago, at the height of the global food crisis, in more than 80 percent of developing countries.
Sheeran, who praised the Obama administration for prioritizing the issue of food security, is in Washington to urge policymakers to keep focused on urgent hunger needs as they seek to craft long-term solutions to hunger.
Looking forward to September's G20 meeting in Pittsburg, which will be chaired by President Barack Obama, she said WFP is calling upon the group "to take action not only on the financial crisis, but also on hunger."
The United States is the world's largest food aid donor and provides approximately half of all food aid to vulnerable populations throughout the world.
U2 singer Bono Vox, widely known for his determination to find solutions to the problems afflicting Africa, got an update on global hunger Sunday in a backstage meeting with Sheeran, before the Irish band's sold-out concert at Amsterdam's ArenA stadium.
During their meeting, Sheeran gave the singer one of the distinctive red cups which symbolize WFP's Fill the Cup campaign to raise funds to help the 66 million children in the world who go to school hungry.
Bono acknowledged that the number of hungry people in the world is “rising fast” and expressed admiration for WFP's work providing free meals to more than 20 million children in school every year
World Food Programme Executive Director Josette Sheeran said Thursday the UN agency aims to feed 108 million hungry people in 74 countries this year, but is facing "dangerous and unprecedented" funding shortfalls.
"Our budget for this year of assessed and approved needs is US$6.7 billion and we expect from our projections and working with government to come in at 3.7 billion," Sheeran said at a press briefing in Washington ahead of meetings at the White House.
The World Food Programme is funded entirely through voluntary contributions, most of which come from governments.
"We are actively cutting $3 billion of our program, which means a reduction in rations and programs throughout the world, including those to the world's most vulnerable people," said Sheeran, a former U.S. under secretary for economic, business, and agricultural affairs in the State Department during the administration of President George W. Bush.
In Bangladesh, home to some of the world's hungriest people, a WFP programme set up to give meals to 300,000 children in school will now reach only 70,000, Sheeran said
In Guatemala, funding shortfalls could mean that in August, around 100,000 children under the age of five, and 50,000 pregnant and lactating women are going to lose their supply of Vitacereal – a nutritious blend of maize, soy and micronutrients.
In Kenya, hunger is on the rise following the failure of the long-rains season in marginal agricultural lowlands and pastoral areas. WFP will run short of cereals in August, and the 3.2 million Kenyans living in arid and semi-arid areas who had been receiving a normal ration will now face reductions in the amount of food they are given.
In Zimbabwe, food insecurity persists despite improvements in agricultural production and a more liberal import policy this year, according to a report issued in June by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Food Programme. The report estimates that 2.8 million people will face food shortages in the coming year.
Sheeran said the world is "rightly" looking for sustainable solutions to the world hunger problem and she commended the Group of Eight industrialized democracies for their $20 billion pledge to boost global food security made earlier this month at the G8 meeting in Italy.
She said the pledge, which focused on agricultural development, showed that the industrialized world "takes the food security issue seriously."
The G8 countries committed to a goal of mobilizing $20 billion over three years "through a coordinated, comprehensive strategy focused on sustainable agriculture development, while keeping a strong commitment to ensure adequate emergency food aid assistance," the government leaders said in their declaration.
While welcoming the G8 pledge, Sheeran said the world needs to recognize the urgent need to buy food for distribution to the people suffering from hunger and poverty, whose number now exceeds one billion.
"The problem is not all about agricultural yields," Sheeran said. "The challenge is people cannot get access to food – whether because of poor infrastructure or because they can't afford it."
Food security has many environmental dimensions, the G8 leaders recognized. "Effective food security actions must be coupled with adaptation and mitigation measures in relation to climate change, sustainable management of water, land, soil and other natural resources, including the protection of biodiversity," they declared.
The food crisis is not over in the developing world, WFP analysis confirms. In fact, the situation is more alarming in many countries than it was a year ago as the impact of high food prices is compounded by the recent financial crisis, Sheeran said.
New data from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization suggests food prices are higher today than a year ago, at the height of the global food crisis, in more than 80 percent of developing countries.
Sheeran, who praised the Obama administration for prioritizing the issue of food security, is in Washington to urge policymakers to keep focused on urgent hunger needs as they seek to craft long-term solutions to hunger.
Looking forward to September's G20 meeting in Pittsburg, which will be chaired by President Barack Obama, she said WFP is calling upon the group "to take action not only on the financial crisis, but also on hunger."
The United States is the world's largest food aid donor and provides approximately half of all food aid to vulnerable populations throughout the world.
U2 singer Bono Vox, widely known for his determination to find solutions to the problems afflicting Africa, got an update on global hunger Sunday in a backstage meeting with Sheeran, before the Irish band's sold-out concert at Amsterdam's ArenA stadium.
During their meeting, Sheeran gave the singer one of the distinctive red cups which symbolize WFP's Fill the Cup campaign to raise funds to help the 66 million children in the world who go to school hungry.
Bono acknowledged that the number of hungry people in the world is “rising fast” and expressed admiration for WFP's work providing free meals to more than 20 million children in school every year
SF eyes UN Climate Center at polluted shipyard
Mayor Gavin Newsom and the United Nations are eyeing a former naval shipyard contaminated by radiation, heavy metals and other industrial toxins as the future site of a sprawling new green technology complex and climate change think tank.
The proposal would turn a section of the Hunters Point Shipyard, one of the most polluted places in the nation according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, into a UN "Global Compact Center" meant to help solve the world's pollution dilemmas and foster clean tech business.
The city hopes to start construction on the center in 2011 and open its doors in 2012. But the project faces many hurdles before it can be realized, including the completion of a complex environmental cleanup, the approval of the city's Board of Supervisors and finding investors.
The U.S. Navy, EPA and state regulators have been working to clean up toxins from the site since the early 1990s and have spent more than $500 million so far. Once finished, the land would be transferred to the city.
"Our current schedule is that the land will be ready to transfer to the city of San Francisco in the middle of 2012," said Mark Ripperda, EPA's project manager for the site. "Timelines can always be changed, but that schedule is pretty solid."
That makes the city's planned 2012 opening unlikely, but officials said the Navy could allow some construction to start before regulators finish their work.
The parcel of land the UN center would occupy would have more than two million square feet of commercial space in a campus-like setting, with views across the bay and to downtown San Francisco. The site would feature a conference center, UN office buildings and have an estimated cost of at least $20 million.
"California, in general, and San Francisco, in particular, has been at the forefront of environmental sustainability and justice for many years and all of the right ingredients are here," said Gavin Power, deputy director of the UN Global Compact.
The shipyard is located next to Candlestick Point, the current home of the San Francisco 49ers, who are planning to leave the city for a new stadium being planned down the peninsula, in the city of Santa Clara.
On Thursday, the same day the mayor announced the proposed UN center, Santa Clara released an environmental impact report for the 49ers' new stadium, moving the team one step closer to leaving.
Newsom has been clear in his desire to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, and the timing of his proposal for a new, high-profile tenant at the site made clear the city is planning to move on with or without the team.
"If the Niners come, they are perfectly compatible," said Michael Cohen, the mayor's director of economic and work force development. "If not, the 25 acres dedicated to the stadium site can be used for a range of alternative purposes."
The UN Center and a future stadium would be key parts of San Francisco's plan to redevelop the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhoods, a project Cohen called "the most important development project in city history."
Voters have approved the redevelopment plan, which is expected to create more than 10,000 new homes, parks and retail space.
The idea that the shipyard would finally be cleaned up led some members of the Hunters Point-Bayview community to greet the proposal with open arms.
"Environmental justice entails not just having the shipyard cleaned up, but also revitalizing to create jobs and parks and affordable housing," Veronica Hunnicutt, chair of the mayor's Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee, said in a statement.
The proposal would turn a section of the Hunters Point Shipyard, one of the most polluted places in the nation according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, into a UN "Global Compact Center" meant to help solve the world's pollution dilemmas and foster clean tech business.
The city hopes to start construction on the center in 2011 and open its doors in 2012. But the project faces many hurdles before it can be realized, including the completion of a complex environmental cleanup, the approval of the city's Board of Supervisors and finding investors.
The U.S. Navy, EPA and state regulators have been working to clean up toxins from the site since the early 1990s and have spent more than $500 million so far. Once finished, the land would be transferred to the city.
"Our current schedule is that the land will be ready to transfer to the city of San Francisco in the middle of 2012," said Mark Ripperda, EPA's project manager for the site. "Timelines can always be changed, but that schedule is pretty solid."
That makes the city's planned 2012 opening unlikely, but officials said the Navy could allow some construction to start before regulators finish their work.
The parcel of land the UN center would occupy would have more than two million square feet of commercial space in a campus-like setting, with views across the bay and to downtown San Francisco. The site would feature a conference center, UN office buildings and have an estimated cost of at least $20 million.
"California, in general, and San Francisco, in particular, has been at the forefront of environmental sustainability and justice for many years and all of the right ingredients are here," said Gavin Power, deputy director of the UN Global Compact.
The shipyard is located next to Candlestick Point, the current home of the San Francisco 49ers, who are planning to leave the city for a new stadium being planned down the peninsula, in the city of Santa Clara.
On Thursday, the same day the mayor announced the proposed UN center, Santa Clara released an environmental impact report for the 49ers' new stadium, moving the team one step closer to leaving.
Newsom has been clear in his desire to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, and the timing of his proposal for a new, high-profile tenant at the site made clear the city is planning to move on with or without the team.
"If the Niners come, they are perfectly compatible," said Michael Cohen, the mayor's director of economic and work force development. "If not, the 25 acres dedicated to the stadium site can be used for a range of alternative purposes."
The UN Center and a future stadium would be key parts of San Francisco's plan to redevelop the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhoods, a project Cohen called "the most important development project in city history."
Voters have approved the redevelopment plan, which is expected to create more than 10,000 new homes, parks and retail space.
The idea that the shipyard would finally be cleaned up led some members of the Hunters Point-Bayview community to greet the proposal with open arms.
"Environmental justice entails not just having the shipyard cleaned up, but also revitalizing to create jobs and parks and affordable housing," Veronica Hunnicutt, chair of the mayor's Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee, said in a statement.
Queen may open Sandringham path under Marine and Coastal Access Bill
The Queen is likely to be one the first landowners to open up private land, on her Sandringham estate, as part of a plan to create a new path around the English coast.
The stretch from King’s Lynn to Hunstanton along the North Norfolk coast has no legal right of way and has been identified as a priority for access by ramblers and the Government’s conservation advisers.
New laws under the Marine and Coastal Access Bill to open up beaches, inlets and clifftops out of bounds to walkers and tourists will come into force in November. Officials from Natural England will then start drawing up detailed plans for the coastal path in consultation with landowners. The scheme is to cost £50 million over the next ten years.
Maps published today show for the first time the scale of the project. They reveal that a third of the 2,748 miles of coastline is closed to the public. They also show that many miles of footpaths already open to walkers could vanish into the sea within 20 years because of erosion. The powers will allow Natural England to identify “spreading room” next to such paths so that they can be moved back over the decades.
Officials have conducted an audit of every section of the English coast and found that people mostly can walk only about two miles before their path is blocked, either because it is too dangerous or it is on private land.
Owners will now be identified to see how best the trail can continue. Private gardens are exempt, and restrictions are often necessary on Ministry of Defence land. Routes may also have to be closed for conservation reasons or for public safety.
Poul Christiansen, acting chairman of Natural England, said that he hoped most areas would welcome the extra income and visitors that a path would attract. A coastal path in the South West, for example, generates £300 million a year for the rural economy, and 76 per cent of the coast in the region is open for walkers.
Mr Christiansen described the sea view trail as “visionary and iconic” and said that it would add enormously to the experience of people visiting the coast. “We are an island, and therefore the sea is and always has been extremely important to us. Millions of us visit it every year,” he said.
The Ramblers Association has led the campaign to open up the coast and is particularly keen to have access to private beaches such as the one at Osborne House on the Isle of Wight, one of Queen Victoria’s favourite retreats, owned by English Heritage. Tom Franklin, the association’s chief executive, said: “Access to our coast is vulnerable and fragmented. The public needs the Government to hold firm and introduce legislation that will make access to our coast the envy of Europe and the world.”
A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said that managers at the Sandringham estate were willing to discuss proposals for the path. Among other coastal scenery on the wish list for ramblers are the Holker Hall estate on the Cumbrian coastal path, owned by the Duke of Devonshire; a private beach along the Beaulieu river owned by the Beaulieu estate, in Hampshire; and Pilling Bank, near Cockerham Sands, Lancashire, where the local authority has banned a right of way along flood defences.
The stretch from King’s Lynn to Hunstanton along the North Norfolk coast has no legal right of way and has been identified as a priority for access by ramblers and the Government’s conservation advisers.
New laws under the Marine and Coastal Access Bill to open up beaches, inlets and clifftops out of bounds to walkers and tourists will come into force in November. Officials from Natural England will then start drawing up detailed plans for the coastal path in consultation with landowners. The scheme is to cost £50 million over the next ten years.
Maps published today show for the first time the scale of the project. They reveal that a third of the 2,748 miles of coastline is closed to the public. They also show that many miles of footpaths already open to walkers could vanish into the sea within 20 years because of erosion. The powers will allow Natural England to identify “spreading room” next to such paths so that they can be moved back over the decades.
Officials have conducted an audit of every section of the English coast and found that people mostly can walk only about two miles before their path is blocked, either because it is too dangerous or it is on private land.
Owners will now be identified to see how best the trail can continue. Private gardens are exempt, and restrictions are often necessary on Ministry of Defence land. Routes may also have to be closed for conservation reasons or for public safety.
Poul Christiansen, acting chairman of Natural England, said that he hoped most areas would welcome the extra income and visitors that a path would attract. A coastal path in the South West, for example, generates £300 million a year for the rural economy, and 76 per cent of the coast in the region is open for walkers.
Mr Christiansen described the sea view trail as “visionary and iconic” and said that it would add enormously to the experience of people visiting the coast. “We are an island, and therefore the sea is and always has been extremely important to us. Millions of us visit it every year,” he said.
The Ramblers Association has led the campaign to open up the coast and is particularly keen to have access to private beaches such as the one at Osborne House on the Isle of Wight, one of Queen Victoria’s favourite retreats, owned by English Heritage. Tom Franklin, the association’s chief executive, said: “Access to our coast is vulnerable and fragmented. The public needs the Government to hold firm and introduce legislation that will make access to our coast the envy of Europe and the world.”
A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said that managers at the Sandringham estate were willing to discuss proposals for the path. Among other coastal scenery on the wish list for ramblers are the Holker Hall estate on the Cumbrian coastal path, owned by the Duke of Devonshire; a private beach along the Beaulieu river owned by the Beaulieu estate, in Hampshire; and Pilling Bank, near Cockerham Sands, Lancashire, where the local authority has banned a right of way along flood defences.
Green and Confused : How to spread a little healthiness in your garden
Is it safe to throw vegetable and fruit peelings and leftovers into the compost? Could pesticides soak into the pile and cause problems when spread on the vegetable garden?
A well-run compost heap functions in much the same way as your liver. It breaks down the various materials passing through it, removing impurities and delivering a purified end product. But, like the liver, compost can suffer if too much is loaded on to it at any one time: cirrhosis of the compost heap might be the outcome.
So, in the same way that you might every so often give up alcohol, detox or flush out your liver, a compost heap needs careful nurturing. Ideally, its feedstock should contain a variety of materials — from lawn clippings to vacuum cleaner dust, from autumn leaves to used coffee filters.
Layering the mixture with a good activator, such as horse manure, is a smart move. Turn the whole lot over once in a while and cover with an old piece of carpet to cook quietly away. Within a few months you should have a lovely, soft, rich material to spread on the vegetable patch or allotment.
Regulations governing the use of pesticides on vegetables and fruit have been tightened over the years, but maintaining a living, breathing compost heap is crucial if various nasty residues are to be eliminated. Many fruits, vegetables and also commercially grown flowers contain the residues of what are called crop-protection compounds. These go by a whole football team of names — the fungicides thiabendazole and dodemorph and the insecticide endosulfan are among the most common.
A proper compost heap will contain all manner of active micro-organisms. This diversity helps to promote the breakdown of the various compounds — with every chance that one of those hundreds of thousands of microbes will be able to degrade residues of a particular pesticide or insecticide. As long as some sort of balance is maintained among the compost ingredients, the residues should quickly disappear.
The Pesticide Action Network (www.pan-uk.org/Projects/Food/index.htm) lists the worst pesticide offenders on the food shelf: potatoes, bread, apples, grapes, tomatoes and cucumbers all feature. The advice is to wash thoroughly, peel, buy organic or, best of all, grow your own. And don’t forget to keep that compost heap warm and healthy.
A well-run compost heap functions in much the same way as your liver. It breaks down the various materials passing through it, removing impurities and delivering a purified end product. But, like the liver, compost can suffer if too much is loaded on to it at any one time: cirrhosis of the compost heap might be the outcome.
So, in the same way that you might every so often give up alcohol, detox or flush out your liver, a compost heap needs careful nurturing. Ideally, its feedstock should contain a variety of materials — from lawn clippings to vacuum cleaner dust, from autumn leaves to used coffee filters.
Layering the mixture with a good activator, such as horse manure, is a smart move. Turn the whole lot over once in a while and cover with an old piece of carpet to cook quietly away. Within a few months you should have a lovely, soft, rich material to spread on the vegetable patch or allotment.
Regulations governing the use of pesticides on vegetables and fruit have been tightened over the years, but maintaining a living, breathing compost heap is crucial if various nasty residues are to be eliminated. Many fruits, vegetables and also commercially grown flowers contain the residues of what are called crop-protection compounds. These go by a whole football team of names — the fungicides thiabendazole and dodemorph and the insecticide endosulfan are among the most common.
A proper compost heap will contain all manner of active micro-organisms. This diversity helps to promote the breakdown of the various compounds — with every chance that one of those hundreds of thousands of microbes will be able to degrade residues of a particular pesticide or insecticide. As long as some sort of balance is maintained among the compost ingredients, the residues should quickly disappear.
The Pesticide Action Network (www.pan-uk.org/Projects/Food/index.htm) lists the worst pesticide offenders on the food shelf: potatoes, bread, apples, grapes, tomatoes and cucumbers all feature. The advice is to wash thoroughly, peel, buy organic or, best of all, grow your own. And don’t forget to keep that compost heap warm and healthy.
Even holdouts leave poisoned mining town
Two years ago, Orval "Hoppy" Ray vowed it would take someone meaner than him to make him leave the town where he was born.
But now the crusty, 84-year-old former miner is moving out, leaving behind a blighted, ghostly landscape, its soil, water and air poisoned by generations of lead-ore extraction that produced bullets for both world wars.
After two heart attacks and a tornado that badly damaged his house, Ray lost whatever fight he had left and decided to accept a government buyout, as nearly all his neighbors in Picher have already done.
"You can't fight City Hall," said Ray, who worked Picher's lead mines in the 1940s and, for now, runs a musty pool hall on the main drag. "They've got you squeezed seven ways from Sunday."
Under the $60 million cleanup program, homeowners and businesses in and around Picher are being bought out, and the buildings will eventually be bulldozed. Some of the contaminated soil has already been hauled away; next to go are the 100-foot-high mountains of lead mining waste that loom over the town.
By early next year, Picher will be little more than a name on a map. From 20,000 people at its peak and about 1,700 when the buyouts started two or three years ago, about 80 are left.
Twister killed 6
Ray and a few dozen other people who had hoped to make a last stand here changed their minds after a tornado tore through Picher in May 2008, killing six people and leveling more than 100 homes.
"Dad had to say yes to a buyout," said his 62-year-old son, Steven. "I had damage. Wallpaper's buckling. I got to get the hell out of there."
Some guess as few as four residents, a dozen at most, will stay, in many cases because they are too stubborn or fearful or sentimental to move, despite buyout offers of around $60,000 for a modest house.
The people who do try to stay, like Jean Henson, will have to survive in a near-wasteland without utilities, police or laws.
"I grew up in the country; we had to haul water," said Henson, 58, who has asthma, emphysema and other ailments. "If I have to, I can do it again."
These are scenes from a town marking its final days: A dust-coated General Electric wall clock sits in a store window, its hands stopped at 2:20. Dogs and cats roam Main Street, searching for scraps of food.
Hoppy's pool hall is one of the last places still open. The thrift store is gone; so is the post office. The schools closed in July, and City Hall will be shuttered by September. Most of the traffic through Picher comes from the dump trucks hauling tons of lead waste.
The Environmental Protection Agency recently warned those who stay behind that the water will eventually be shut off.
"Some people still just don't believe it," said Larry Roberts, operations manager of the federal fund that helps families move out of lead-polluted communities. "I guess when the taps are shut off, they'll realize the situation they're in."
Part of 40-square-mile Superfund site
Picher is probably among the bleakest, most contaminated spots in one of the biggest Superfund cleanup sites in the country, a 40-square-mile expanse of former lead- and zinc-mining towns that extends into Missouri and Kansas. Within that zone, the creek spews orange from pollution, mine cave-ins and sinkholes threaten, and lead dust has fouled nearly everything.
At the pool hall, Ray recalled the glory days in Picher before the mines closed nearly 40 years ago: The football game in which Picher's broad-shouldered mining boys demolished a neighboring town's team 115-0. The one-room houses on Fourth Street that made up the red-light district. The saloons with names like the Bloody Knuckle.
The pool hall doubles as a museum. Hardhats line the walls, and hunks of calcite, dolomite and galena hewn from the town's mines are displayed in a glass case as if they were championship trophies.
"This is Dad's life," said his son, who is also waiting to be bought out. "This is the heart and soul of who he is."
But now the crusty, 84-year-old former miner is moving out, leaving behind a blighted, ghostly landscape, its soil, water and air poisoned by generations of lead-ore extraction that produced bullets for both world wars.
After two heart attacks and a tornado that badly damaged his house, Ray lost whatever fight he had left and decided to accept a government buyout, as nearly all his neighbors in Picher have already done.
"You can't fight City Hall," said Ray, who worked Picher's lead mines in the 1940s and, for now, runs a musty pool hall on the main drag. "They've got you squeezed seven ways from Sunday."
Under the $60 million cleanup program, homeowners and businesses in and around Picher are being bought out, and the buildings will eventually be bulldozed. Some of the contaminated soil has already been hauled away; next to go are the 100-foot-high mountains of lead mining waste that loom over the town.
By early next year, Picher will be little more than a name on a map. From 20,000 people at its peak and about 1,700 when the buyouts started two or three years ago, about 80 are left.
Twister killed 6
Ray and a few dozen other people who had hoped to make a last stand here changed their minds after a tornado tore through Picher in May 2008, killing six people and leveling more than 100 homes.
"Dad had to say yes to a buyout," said his 62-year-old son, Steven. "I had damage. Wallpaper's buckling. I got to get the hell out of there."
Some guess as few as four residents, a dozen at most, will stay, in many cases because they are too stubborn or fearful or sentimental to move, despite buyout offers of around $60,000 for a modest house.
The people who do try to stay, like Jean Henson, will have to survive in a near-wasteland without utilities, police or laws.
"I grew up in the country; we had to haul water," said Henson, 58, who has asthma, emphysema and other ailments. "If I have to, I can do it again."
These are scenes from a town marking its final days: A dust-coated General Electric wall clock sits in a store window, its hands stopped at 2:20. Dogs and cats roam Main Street, searching for scraps of food.
Hoppy's pool hall is one of the last places still open. The thrift store is gone; so is the post office. The schools closed in July, and City Hall will be shuttered by September. Most of the traffic through Picher comes from the dump trucks hauling tons of lead waste.
The Environmental Protection Agency recently warned those who stay behind that the water will eventually be shut off.
"Some people still just don't believe it," said Larry Roberts, operations manager of the federal fund that helps families move out of lead-polluted communities. "I guess when the taps are shut off, they'll realize the situation they're in."
Part of 40-square-mile Superfund site
Picher is probably among the bleakest, most contaminated spots in one of the biggest Superfund cleanup sites in the country, a 40-square-mile expanse of former lead- and zinc-mining towns that extends into Missouri and Kansas. Within that zone, the creek spews orange from pollution, mine cave-ins and sinkholes threaten, and lead dust has fouled nearly everything.
At the pool hall, Ray recalled the glory days in Picher before the mines closed nearly 40 years ago: The football game in which Picher's broad-shouldered mining boys demolished a neighboring town's team 115-0. The one-room houses on Fourth Street that made up the red-light district. The saloons with names like the Bloody Knuckle.
The pool hall doubles as a museum. Hardhats line the walls, and hunks of calcite, dolomite and galena hewn from the town's mines are displayed in a glass case as if they were championship trophies.
"This is Dad's life," said his son, who is also waiting to be bought out. "This is the heart and soul of who he is."
SF eyes UN Climate Center at polluted shipyard
Mayor Gavin Newsom and the United Nations are eyeing a former naval shipyard contaminated by radiation, heavy metals and other industrial toxins as the future site of a sprawling new green technology complex and climate change think tank.
The proposal would turn a section of the Hunters Point Shipyard, one of the most polluted places in the nation according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, into a UN "Global Compact Center" meant to help solve the world's pollution dilemmas and foster clean tech business.
The city hopes to start construction on the center in 2011 and open its doors in 2012. But the project faces many hurdles before it can be realized, including the completion of a complex environmental cleanup, the approval of the city's Board of Supervisors and finding investors.
The U.S. Navy, EPA and state regulators have been working to clean up toxins from the site since the early 1990s and have spent more than $500 million so far. Once finished, the land would be transferred to the city.
"Our current schedule is that the land will be ready to transfer to the city of San Francisco in the middle of 2012," said Mark Ripperda, EPA's project manager for the site. "Timelines can always be changed, but that schedule is pretty solid."
That makes the city's planned 2012 opening unlikely, but officials said the Navy could allow some construction to start before regulators finish their work.
The parcel of land the UN center would occupy would have more than two million square feet of commercial space in a campus-like setting, with views across the bay and to downtown San Francisco. The site would feature a conference center, UN office buildings and have an estimated cost of at least $20 million.
"California, in general, and San Francisco, in particular, has been at the forefront of environmental sustainability and justice for many years and all of the right ingredients are here," said Gavin Power, deputy director of the UN Global Compact.
The shipyard is located next to Candlestick Point, the current home of the San Francisco 49ers, who are planning to leave the city for a new stadium being planned down the peninsula, in the city of Santa Clara.
On Thursday, the same day the mayor announced the proposed UN center, Santa Clara released an environmental impact report for the 49ers' new stadium, moving the team one step closer to leaving.
Newsom has been clear in his desire to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, and the timing of his proposal for a new, high-profile tenant at the site made clear the city is planning to move on with or without the team.
"If the Niners come, they are perfectly compatible," said Michael Cohen, the mayor's director of economic and work force development. "If not, the 25 acres dedicated to the stadium site can be used for a range of alternative purposes."
The UN Center and a future stadium would be key parts of San Francisco's plan to redevelop the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhoods, a project Cohen called "the most important development project in city history."
Voters have approved the redevelopment plan, which is expected to create more than 10,000 new homes, parks and retail space.
The idea that the shipyard would finally be cleaned up led some members of the Hunters Point-Bayview community to greet the proposal with open arms.
"Environmental justice entails not just having the shipyard cleaned up, but also revitalizing to create jobs and parks and affordable housing," Veronica Hunnicutt, chair of the mayor's Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens
The proposal would turn a section of the Hunters Point Shipyard, one of the most polluted places in the nation according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, into a UN "Global Compact Center" meant to help solve the world's pollution dilemmas and foster clean tech business.
The city hopes to start construction on the center in 2011 and open its doors in 2012. But the project faces many hurdles before it can be realized, including the completion of a complex environmental cleanup, the approval of the city's Board of Supervisors and finding investors.
The U.S. Navy, EPA and state regulators have been working to clean up toxins from the site since the early 1990s and have spent more than $500 million so far. Once finished, the land would be transferred to the city.
"Our current schedule is that the land will be ready to transfer to the city of San Francisco in the middle of 2012," said Mark Ripperda, EPA's project manager for the site. "Timelines can always be changed, but that schedule is pretty solid."
That makes the city's planned 2012 opening unlikely, but officials said the Navy could allow some construction to start before regulators finish their work.
The parcel of land the UN center would occupy would have more than two million square feet of commercial space in a campus-like setting, with views across the bay and to downtown San Francisco. The site would feature a conference center, UN office buildings and have an estimated cost of at least $20 million.
"California, in general, and San Francisco, in particular, has been at the forefront of environmental sustainability and justice for many years and all of the right ingredients are here," said Gavin Power, deputy director of the UN Global Compact.
The shipyard is located next to Candlestick Point, the current home of the San Francisco 49ers, who are planning to leave the city for a new stadium being planned down the peninsula, in the city of Santa Clara.
On Thursday, the same day the mayor announced the proposed UN center, Santa Clara released an environmental impact report for the 49ers' new stadium, moving the team one step closer to leaving.
Newsom has been clear in his desire to keep the 49ers in San Francisco, and the timing of his proposal for a new, high-profile tenant at the site made clear the city is planning to move on with or without the team.
"If the Niners come, they are perfectly compatible," said Michael Cohen, the mayor's director of economic and work force development. "If not, the 25 acres dedicated to the stadium site can be used for a range of alternative purposes."
The UN Center and a future stadium would be key parts of San Francisco's plan to redevelop the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhoods, a project Cohen called "the most important development project in city history."
Voters have approved the redevelopment plan, which is expected to create more than 10,000 new homes, parks and retail space.
The idea that the shipyard would finally be cleaned up led some members of the Hunters Point-Bayview community to greet the proposal with open arms.
"Environmental justice entails not just having the shipyard cleaned up, but also revitalizing to create jobs and parks and affordable housing," Veronica Hunnicutt, chair of the mayor's Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens
how will key senators vote on a climate bill
<>Sen. Bob Corker came out swinging against the climate bill that the House passed in June.
“I didn’t think it was possible, but the Waxman-Markey climate bill appears to be even more problematic than the climate bill that tanked in the Senate last spring,” he said, referring to the Lieberman-Warner bill that he voted against in 2008. “I don’t know of many special interests that don’t receive a pay-off in this [Waxman-Markey] legislation, and if it comes to the Senate floor in this form, I’ll vote against it.”
Yet Corker understands that climate change is a problem and has called for legislation to address it. In 2007, he traveled to Greenland with a bipartisan group of senators to observe the impacts of climate change, noting upon his return that the U.S. has “a unique opportunity to marry concerns ... like carbon dioxide emissions and energy security.” He said he was “leaning in the direction” of supporting a carbon-trading program.
Lately Corker has been insisting that he won’t accept anything short of a climate plan that auctions 100 percent of pollution permits and returns the money directly to Americans, and his preferred approach would be a carbon tax.
“I want to tell you that I wish we would just talk about a carbon tax, 100 percent of which would be returned to the American people. So there’s no net dollars that would come out of the American people’s pockets,” Corker told Al Gore during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year.
When the Obama administration rolled out its first budget this year with a framework for a cap-and-trade plan that would have returned roughly 80 percent of the revenues from pollution permits to citizens, Corker bashed it. He called the proposal “slight of hand” and said it is a “massive climate tax increase all Americans will pay.”
His office put out a press release shortly thereafter, noting, “Corker has worked to ensure that whatever Congress implements, be it a cap-and-trade system that acts as a tax or a transparent carbon tax, that 100 percent of the tax revenue is returned to the American people and is not used to increase the size of government.”
So it looks like Corker won’t accept anything short of a complete cap-and-dividend approach, which doesn’t seem to have much traction with most other members of Congress. Don’t count on him for a “yes” vote on whatever climate bill emerges from the Senate.
“I didn’t think it was possible, but the Waxman-Markey climate bill appears to be even more problematic than the climate bill that tanked in the Senate last spring,” he said, referring to the Lieberman-Warner bill that he voted against in 2008. “I don’t know of many special interests that don’t receive a pay-off in this [Waxman-Markey] legislation, and if it comes to the Senate floor in this form, I’ll vote against it.”
Yet Corker understands that climate change is a problem and has called for legislation to address it. In 2007, he traveled to Greenland with a bipartisan group of senators to observe the impacts of climate change, noting upon his return that the U.S. has “a unique opportunity to marry concerns ... like carbon dioxide emissions and energy security.” He said he was “leaning in the direction” of supporting a carbon-trading program.
Lately Corker has been insisting that he won’t accept anything short of a climate plan that auctions 100 percent of pollution permits and returns the money directly to Americans, and his preferred approach would be a carbon tax.
“I want to tell you that I wish we would just talk about a carbon tax, 100 percent of which would be returned to the American people. So there’s no net dollars that would come out of the American people’s pockets,” Corker told Al Gore during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year.
When the Obama administration rolled out its first budget this year with a framework for a cap-and-trade plan that would have returned roughly 80 percent of the revenues from pollution permits to citizens, Corker bashed it. He called the proposal “slight of hand” and said it is a “massive climate tax increase all Americans will pay.”
His office put out a press release shortly thereafter, noting, “Corker has worked to ensure that whatever Congress implements, be it a cap-and-trade system that acts as a tax or a transparent carbon tax, that 100 percent of the tax revenue is returned to the American people and is not used to increase the size of government.”
So it looks like Corker won’t accept anything short of a complete cap-and-dividend approach, which doesn’t seem to have much traction with most other members of Congress. Don’t count on him for a “yes” vote on whatever climate bill emerges from the Senate.
how will key senators vote on a climate bill?
Bob Corker came out swinging against the climate bill that the House passed in June.
“I didn’t think it was possible, but the Waxman-Markey climate bill appears to be even more problematic than the climate bill that tanked in the Senate last spring,” he said, referring to the Lieberman-Warner bill that he voted against in 2008. “I don’t know of many special interests that don’t receive a pay-off in this [Waxman-Markey] legislation, and if it comes to the Senate floor in this form, I’ll vote against it.”
Yet Corker understands that climate change is a problem and has called for legislation to address it. In 2007, he traveled to Greenland with a bipartisan group of senators to observe the impacts of climate change, noting upon his return that the U.S. has “a unique opportunity to marry concerns ... like carbon dioxide emissions and energy security.” He said he was “leaning in the direction” of supporting a carbon-trading program.
Lately Corker has been insisting that he won’t accept anything short of a climate plan that auctions 100 percent of pollution permits and returns the money directly to Americans, and his preferred approach would be a carbon tax.
“I want to tell you that I wish we would just talk about a carbon tax, 100 percent of which would be returned to the American people. So there’s no net dollars that would come out of the American people’s pockets,” Corker told Al Gore during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year.
When the Obama administration rolled out its first budget this year with a framework for a cap-and-trade plan that would have returned roughly 80 percent of the revenues from pollution permits to citizens, Corker bashed it. He called the proposal “slight of hand” and said it is a “massive climate tax increase all Americans will pay.”
His office put out a press release shortly thereafter, noting, “Corker has worked to ensure that whatever Congress implements, be it a cap-and-trade system that acts as a tax or a transparent carbon tax, that 100 percent of the tax revenue is returned to the American people and is not used to increase the size of government.”
So it looks like Corker won’t accept anything short of a complete cap-and-dividend approach, which doesn’t seem to have much traction with most other members of Congress. Don’t count on him for a “yes” vote on whatever climate bill emerges from the Senate.
“I didn’t think it was possible, but the Waxman-Markey climate bill appears to be even more problematic than the climate bill that tanked in the Senate last spring,” he said, referring to the Lieberman-Warner bill that he voted against in 2008. “I don’t know of many special interests that don’t receive a pay-off in this [Waxman-Markey] legislation, and if it comes to the Senate floor in this form, I’ll vote against it.”
Yet Corker understands that climate change is a problem and has called for legislation to address it. In 2007, he traveled to Greenland with a bipartisan group of senators to observe the impacts of climate change, noting upon his return that the U.S. has “a unique opportunity to marry concerns ... like carbon dioxide emissions and energy security.” He said he was “leaning in the direction” of supporting a carbon-trading program.
Lately Corker has been insisting that he won’t accept anything short of a climate plan that auctions 100 percent of pollution permits and returns the money directly to Americans, and his preferred approach would be a carbon tax.
“I want to tell you that I wish we would just talk about a carbon tax, 100 percent of which would be returned to the American people. So there’s no net dollars that would come out of the American people’s pockets,” Corker told Al Gore during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year.
When the Obama administration rolled out its first budget this year with a framework for a cap-and-trade plan that would have returned roughly 80 percent of the revenues from pollution permits to citizens, Corker bashed it. He called the proposal “slight of hand” and said it is a “massive climate tax increase all Americans will pay.”
His office put out a press release shortly thereafter, noting, “Corker has worked to ensure that whatever Congress implements, be it a cap-and-trade system that acts as a tax or a transparent carbon tax, that 100 percent of the tax revenue is returned to the American people and is not used to increase the size of government.”
So it looks like Corker won’t accept anything short of a complete cap-and-dividend approach, which doesn’t seem to have much traction with most other members of Congress. Don’t count on him for a “yes” vote on whatever climate bill emerges from the Senate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)