====================
From Canada Free Press:
By Alan Caruba
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Reading the Environmental Protection Agency’s news releases is a trip into the world of science fiction, of fantastical assertions and predictions that have no relationship to reality. The EPA is a most wicked assemblage of alleged scientists and political appointees whose sole purpose is to economically burden the industrial, commercial, and agricultural sectors of the nation in every way possible.
Most reporters covering environmental issues these days are so brainwashed and brain dead they never actually question the drivel that the EPA shovels on a daily basis. The latest is a March 16 release “EPA Proposes First National Standard for Mercury Pollution from Power Plants.” The key words here are “power plants”, the 24/7 generators of the electricity we all depend upon.
By burdening power plants with unnecessary costs the EPA drives up the price of electricity and are thus able to make a better case for “renewables”, the worst, most unreliable and most unaffordable producers of electricity, wind and solar power. In the process, they get to demonize coal-burning plants that produce fifty percent of the electricity.
The opening paragraph of the EPA release is a staggering 100-plus words in length, two run-on sentences that would earn any high school English student a failing grade.
“WASHINGTON – In response to a court deadline, today the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the first-ever national standards for mercury, arsenic and other toxic air pollution from power plants. The new power plant mercury and air toxics standards – which eliminate 20 years of uncertainty across industry – would require many power plants to install widely available, proven pollution control technologies to cut harmful emissions of mercury, arsenic, chromium, nickel and acid gases, while preventing as many as 17,000 premature deaths and 11,000 heart attacks a year. The new proposed standards would also provide particular health benefits for children, preventing 120,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 11,000 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year. The proposed standards would also avert more than 12,000 emergency room visits and hospital admissions and 850,000 fewer days of work missed due to illness.
The assertions made on behalf of the proposed rule, one that the EPA has waited eleven years to slip by the public, are so absurd that it is testimony to how stupid the EPA thinks the public is.
It is an aggregation of statistics without any citation of their source, all intended to drive home the horrors that Americans have allegedly been living with and fanciful health threats the rule will allegedly prevent. How can anyone know or even predict how many “emergency room visits” are attributable to mercury, arsenic, chromium, nickel, and acid gas emissions? And who among you knows the actual amounts? The facts put the lie to this fear-mongering and the EPA’s own monitoring data provide them!
The release continues in this fear-mongering vein, blandly stating that “Toxic air pollutants like mercury from coal-and-oil fired plants have been shown to cause neurological damage, including lower IQ, in children exposed in the womb and during early development.” So this new rule is all about saving unborn and infant children from the horrible coal-and-oil plants. How much government regulation is attributed to protecting children? A lot! Where is the proof offered by the EPA for this assertion? Not stated.
Again, if these emissions are such a dire health hazard, why did it take eleven years for the EPA to take action? The answer to that is that this EPA is operating within the most Leftist, power-grabbing administration in the history of the nation. It is under the control of a known socialist, Carol Browner, the President’s energy and environmental czar, and her sock puppet, Lisa Jackson, the Director of the EPA.
If you want to learn the truth about the state of the nation’s air quality and the lies being told by the EPA, you should read Steve Milloy’s 16-page analysis, “EPA’s Clean Air Act: Pretending air pollution is worse than it is”, posted to Junkscience.com on March 9, 2011.
“The EPA relies on health studies that exaggerate harm and economic studies that understate regulatory costs in order to maintain the fiction that its ever-more stringent regulations are providing meaningful public health benefits,” says Milloy. He then cites studies of particulate matter in 32 Midwest and Eastern states covered by the Clean Air Transport Rule that demonstrate how meaningless the EPA assertions are.
“There is no tangible scientific evidence that current air quality standards are not already more than sufficiently protective of public heath. Data has been hidden from the public by the agency and by a clique of EPA-funded researchers.”
You’re being duped.
***Written by Alan Caruba**** Emphasis added.
LINK
*******************
Do you find the EPA to be HYPOCRITES about Mercury? Power plants being strangled with guidelines and requirements, YET the EPA is pushing the CFL lightbulbs that CONTAIN MERCURY?
Compact fluorescent bulbs use an average of 50 percent less energy than standard incandescent bulbs and have a dramatically increased life span. These bulbs also have a few dangers that should be considered prior to installation.
-
Mercury
-
All CFL bulbs contain mercury, which has been associated with kidney and brain damage. Although the bulbs are safe when used properly, broken bulbs present cleanup and disposal problems.
Breakage
-
Broken CFL bulbs can allow mercury to be dispersed into the environment in the vicinity of the breakage. Cleanup of broken bulbs requires careful methods be used without vacuuming.
Disposal
-
Broken or burned out CFL bulbs should be recycled to minimize the amount of mercury entering the waste stream. Exact guidelines on disposal and recycling have not yet been established.
Environmental Concerns
-
The amount of mercury in an average “low mercury” CFL bulb is very small, about 5 milligrams. That amount is sufficient to render 1,000 gallons of water unsafe for human consumption. (PER BULB)
-
Read more: What Are the Dangers of Cfl Light Bulbs? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_5612315_dangers-cfl-light-bulbs_.html#ixzz1GrI7hoQo
*********************************
Cleaning Up a Broken CFL
What to Do if a Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) Bulb or Fluorescent Tube Light Bulb Breaks in Your Home: Overview
Fluorescent light bulbs contain a small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing. When a fluorescent bulb breaks in your home, some of this mercury is released as mercury vapor. The broken bulb can continue to release mercury vapor until it is cleaned up and removed from the residence. To minimize exposure to mercury vapor, EPA recommends that residents follow the cleanup and disposal steps described below.
This page presents only the most important steps to reduce exposure to mercury vapor from a broken bulb.
► View the detailed recommendations.
► Download and print a three-page PDF version of this overview and the detailed recommendations (91K, about PDF) |en español (30K, about PDF)
- Before cleanup
- Have people and pets leave the room.
- Air out the room for 5-10 minutes by opening a window or door to the outdoor environment.
- Shut off the central forced air heating/air-conditioning system, if you have one.
- Collect materials needed to clean up broken bulb.
- During cleanup
- Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder.
- Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.
- After cleanup
- Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of properly. Avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors.
- If practical, continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.
http://epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
=======================
ADD THIS GEM: Read by clicking blue link below
Wind Power Causes Gridlock
By Peter C. Glover Full Story
‘Hamish’ lives in a remote, relatively windy, farmhouse location in Scotland. Being an unreconstructed liberal with cash to splash, Hamish decided eighteen months ago to invest in his ‘free’ wind power dream. Disgusted that his power company would not buy any excess electricity a ‘home’ turbine would produce, Hamish switched to the one Scottish power company that was prepared to buy it. By February 2011, having bought his £55,000 ($88,000) turbine and completed the infrastructure and after the power company laid the cables, Hamish received a bombshell. Having tested the system the power company refused to allow Hamish to turn it all on because variable wind surges would trip out the power grid.
=====================
Bat Fatalities at Wind Turbines: Investigating the Causes and Consequences
In the push to develop new forms of sustainable energy, the wind power industry is at the forefront. Turbines that harness the power of wind already serve as effective power sources across the globe, and this proven effectiveness has led to vast increases in the number of turbines currently under construction. The general impact of wind turbines on the environment is likely far less than that of conventional power sources. However, recent evidence shows that certain species of bats are particularly susceptible to mortality from wind turbines. Bats are beneficial consumers of harmful insect pests, and migratory species of bats cross international and interstate boundaries.
Dead bats are turning up beneath wind turbines all over the world. Bat fatalities have now been documented at nearly every wind facility in North America where adequate surveys for bats have been conducted, and several of these sites are estimated to cause the deaths of thousands of bats per year. This unanticipated and unprecedented problem for bats has moved to the forefront of conservation and management efforts directed toward this poorly understood group of mammals. The mystery of why bats die at turbine sites remains unsolved. Is it a simple case of flying in the wrong place at the wrong time? Are bats attracted to the spinning turbine blades? Why are so many bats colliding with turbines compared to their infrequent crashes with other tall, human-made structures?
[Emphasis added]
LINK
=======================
Bird Deaths from Wind Farms to Continue Under New Federal Voluntary Industry Guidelines
By Robert Johns
 |
| Golden Eagle. Photo: ClipArt.com |
(Washington, D.C., February 8, 2011) Draft voluntary federal guidelines issued today by the Interior Department that focus on the wildlife impacts of wind energy will result in continued increases in bird deaths and habitat loss from wind farms across the country, says American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization. Members of the public will have 90 days to provide comments on the proposed guidelines to the Secretary of the Interior prior to a final version being concluded.
“We had hoped that at the end of this multi-year, Interior Department process, we would see mandatory regulations that would provide a reasonable measure of restraint and control on a potentially very green energy source, but instead we get voluntary guidelines,” said ABC Vice-President Mike Parr.
“Bird deaths from wind power are the new inconvenient truth. The total number of birds killed and the amount of bird habitat lost will dramatically increase as wind power build-out continues across the country in a rush to meet federal renewable energy targets,” Parr said.
“We fast-tracked dams in the first half of the last century at the expense of America’s rivers. Now we’re having to tear many of them down. Let’s not fast track wind energy at the expense of America’s birds. Just a few small changes need to be made to make wind bird-smart, but without these, wind power simply can’t be considered a green technology” Parr said.
“This action did not have to result in voluntary guidelines. DOI has the authority under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to enact regulations protecting migratory birds. Further, it is troubling that this announcement was made without the final documents being available that would enable a review of exactly what is being proposed,” Parr said.
Some of the most iconic and vulnerable American birds are at risk from wind industry expansion unless this expansion is carefully planned and implemented. Onshore, these include Golden Eagles, Whooping Cranes, sage-grouse, prairie-chickens, and many migratory songbirds. Offshore, Brown Pelicans, Northern Gannets, sea ducks, loons, and terns are among the birds at risk.
“Federal government estimates indicate that 22,000 wind turbines in operation in 2009 were killing 440,000 birds per year. We are very concerned that with Federal plans to produce 20 percent of the nation’s electricity from wind by 2030, those numbers will mushroom. To meet the 2030 goal, the nation will need to produce about 12 times more wind energy than in 2009.” he added.
“The guidelines ask the wind industry to do the right things, but there is no reason to believe that any will happen with any consistency. The poster child for the wind industry’s environmental track record is the Altamont Pass Wind Farm in California. Despite years of concern voiced by many in the wildlife community about large numbers of eagles and other raptors being killed at Altamont, it took a lawsuit to get the industry to respond,” Parr said.
“Birds continue to be killed at Altamont and other wind farms in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act,” he added.
LINK
=========================
NEW WEBSITE ON THE BIRD-WINDFARM PROBLEM:
www.savetheeaglesinternational.org
=======================
Enlightenment
Education
Empowerment
[...] Pay ATTENTION America: The EPA’s Fantastic Clean Air Fictions [...]