Monday, December 29, 2014

COREXIT - BP oil spill dispersants concern Nova Scotia environmentalist

Bill C-22 is 'an absolute, total abdication of regulatory responsibility'

CBC News Posted: Dec 29, 2014 9:38 AM AT Last Updated: Dec 29, 2014 9:38 AM AT
Crude oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill washes ashore in Orange Beach, Ala., on June 12, 2010.
Crude oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill washes ashore in Orange Beach, Ala., on June 12, 2010. (Dave Martin/Associated Press


A Shelburne County environmentalist is raising concerns about a toxic chemical that could be used off Nova Scotia in the future.

When the Deepwater Horizon oil platform erupted in flames in 2010, it spewed oil into the Gulf of Mexico, but some research says the cleanup was worse because about 6.8 million litres of the chemical Corexit 9500A was used to disperse the oil.

The dispersant used by oil company BP, when mixed with crude oil, was found to be 52 times more toxic than oil alone to some microscopic plankton-like organisms called rotifers.

"When you mix this stuff with the oil, you create a compound that is substantially more dangerous than even the dangerous dispersant on its own or even the dangerous oil on its own and this is the issue that we have," says John Davis, a founder of the No Rigs Coalition.

He says Shell has already put out bids to use Corexit if there is a spill at a well planned for the Shelburne Gully.

"The creators of CoRexit will tell you it's less toxic than dish soap. All you have to do is read the warning label to know that it’s a highly, highly dangerous chemical.… There is no doubt in my mind that if Shell made the effort they could find ways to clean up the oil and not just be prepared to disperse it and put it under water and out of sight," he says.
'Total abdication of regulatory responsibility'

Davis says there is legislation in place to prevent the use of chemicals like Corexit, “but what happened here is that the federal government has decided to put forward legislation called Bill C-22 — which in fact creates a circumstance where the oil company can go and utilize the product, the dispersants, and then report after the fact to the regulatory agencies. It is an absolute, total abdication of regulatory responsibility.”

Bill C-22 was introduced by the federal minister of Natural Resources earlier this year.

It would pre-approve emergency plans for oil and gas companies to deal with spills, such as the speedy use of dispersants, or chemicals used to break oil into smaller particles in the event of an oil spill at sea.

Davis says he worries the chemical could end up on the Georges Bank, pointing out the Labrador Current would carry any material right to the fertile fishing grounds.



"It’s that [upwelling of water] that provides much of the nutrients that makes Georges Bank such an important biological place — and so important to us as an economical generator," he says.

A publication in the February 2013 issue of the scientific journal Environmental Pollution, found that on their own, the oil and dispersant were equally toxic. But when combined, the oil and dispersant increased toxicity to one of the rotifer species by a factor of 52.
'High and immediate human health hazards​'

Dispersants cause giant pools of spilled oil floating atop the sea to break up into tiny droplets that then dilute with water just below the surface. The process helps creatures including turtles, birds and mammals that need access to the surface, and also ensures less oil flows ashore where it can choke coastal wildlife. However, it increases the amount of oil just below the surface, potentially contaminating the organisms that live there.

Scientists at the Autonomous University of Aguascalientes in Mexico and the Georgia Institute of Technology now say Corexit 9500A is far more harmful than previously thought to a key dweller of those sub-surface depths.

An Environment Canada study states the dispersant is 27 times safer than common dish soap, but some say that figure is dangerously misleading. The study also states that five of Corexit's 57 ingredients are linked to cancer and can pose "high and immediate human health hazards."

In all, the British Petroleum oil leak was the largest offshore petroleum spill in U.S. history, sending 4.9 million barrels (584 million litres) of crude into the Gulf of Mexico.

Friday, December 12, 2014

CLF Scoop: Study Commission Nears Final Recommendations to Counter Ocean Acidification


CLF Scoop: Study Commission Nears Final Recommendations to Counter Ocean Acidification



Posted: 11 Dec 2014 12:55 PM PST

Richard Nelson, Lobsterman in Friendship, Maine
The sixteen member commission empowered by the Maine legislature to conduct a brief, six month investigation into the effects of coastal and ocean acidification on fish and shellfish commercially harvested in Maine nears the end of its term and recommends further study and other measures to immediately begin to address the impacts of ocean acidification.
As noted in prior blogs here and here, offshore ocean acidification occurs when carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels, gets deposited in the ocean, and mixes with water to form carbonic acid. Near shore coastal acidification occurs when runoff from storms carries nitrogen, acidic fresh water, and other pollutants to the ocean. The nitrogen and other nutrient rich pollutants cause algal blooms, which die and release carbon dioxide into the ocean. Both forms of acidification dissolve shells of larval shellfish and possibly stunt growth of lobsters and crabs by causing them to form extra hard outer shells.
The study commission did an impressive job. Its members were appointed by the legislature and by the Commissioner of Maine's Department of Marine Resources. They worked with a practically non-existent budget and largely volunteered their time away from their jobs as lobstermen, shellfish harvesters, shellfish farmers, marine researchers, scientists and more. During meetings and on various subcommittees, the members generously shared their expertise and commitment to working together.
The result of their efforts will be seen soon, when the Commission releases its final report. The near final draft contains a complete listing of all research regarding the effects of ocean acidification on Maine marine life and recommends actions we can take to prevent ocean acidification from destroying our commercial shellfisheries, including lobsters which account for 80% of commercial landings in Maine. The report also appends proposed new legislation that would establish a long term study commission to coordinate further research into the many areas where we lack data and further measures to combat ocean acidification.
Here are some things that we all can do to protect our shellfish from ocean acidification:
  • Reduce carbon emissions- drive less, switch from oil to cleaner heat sources, explore ways to be more energy efficient
  • Reduce or eliminate use of lawn fertilizers or time their spread to eliminate runoff of fertilizers into coastal marine waters
  • Do not dump pet waste or other waste down sewers
  • Support legislation that reduces carbon emissions on a national and local level
  • Support the proposed law to establish a more permanent ocean acidification study commission
For more information about the study, read these stories from Portland Press Herold and MPBN.
The post Study Commission Nears Final Recommendations to Counter Ocean Acidification appeared first on Conservation Law Foundation.

Monday, June 2, 2014

TIDAL POWER: Request for public input on potential locations for tidal turbines in Grand Passage

Request for public input on potential locations for tidal turbines in Grand Passage


Fundy Tidal is seeking public input on potential locations for tidal turbines in Grand Passage.  Turbine locations will be selected based on many factors, including community input, flow speeds, depth, seabed, waves, marine life, fishing zones, and acceptable infringement on navigation.  Fundy Tidal is currently assessing these factors working in collaboration with Dalhousie University, Acadia University, University of New Brunswick, Dynamic Systems Analysis, and Clean Current Power Systems.

A 1-year demonstration is planned with a turbine from Clean Current, with deployment scheduled for spring 2015.  The Clean Current turbine is 3.5 m in diameter and has a rated power of 65 kW.  The turbine would supply approximately 130,000 kWh of energy annually, which is enough to power approximately 6 to 8 homes. The Clean Current turbine is shown on Figure 1, and more information is available at www.cleancurrent.com.

Five study areas in Grand Passage are shown on Figure 2.  The study areas are locations within which a turbine or turbines could be deployed.  Based on technical considerations, study area GP-3 is currently the preferred location for demonstrating and testing the Clean Current turbine.  However, continued assessment including community input could lead to development in other study areas.  Any study area selected for further investigation will require detailed assessment of tidal flow and seabed conditions, monitoring environmental conditions, and environmental assessment.

The study areas are large compared to the footprint of an actual development.  An example footprint within study site GP-3 is shown on Figure 3.  The example shown is a 10 x 15 meter floating platform (red box), surrounded by a 50 x 55 meter no navigation zone (green box) to allow safe clearance of the mooring lines.  The design requires site-specific refinement, and is intended to provide a sense of scale for the impact of a floating turbine platform in Grand Passage.  Submerged designs that would pose minimal, or no, infringement on navigation are also being assessed.

We are seeking public input on the study areas, including preferred locations assuming both floating and submerged designs. Specific focus on the potential for a floating platform in GP-3 would be appreciated, and feedback on all study areas is valued.

A study area will be selected as the focus for activities during the summer, fall, and winter of 2014, leading to deployment of a turbine in early 2015.

A questionnaire intended to assist in providing input is available in Print Format or Online Format. Hard copies of the questionnaire and this notice have been posted at several businesses and public service buildings throughout the islands, with additional copies available to take home. This notice has also been posted to the "Islanders" and "Brier Island" Facebook groups.

Feedback can be provided through the Online Questionnaire or by email to community@fundytidal.com , mail to Box 1209, Westport, Nova Scotia, Canada B0V 1H0, and in public forum in Freeport on May 18, 2014.  An information and discussion session will be held following the Fireman's Breakfast.  For further information on Fundy Tidal please visit www.fundytidal.com.


Figure 1: Clean Current tidal turbine



Figure 2: Grand Passage study site locations.  Green squares are labels only, they do not indicate positioning of turbines. The study areas are locations within which a turbine or turbines could be deployed, and are large compared to the footprint of an actual development (see Figure 3).




Figure 3: Example floating turbine footprint in study area GP-3. The example shown is a 10 x 15 meter floating platform (red box), surrounded by a 50 x 55 meter no navigation zone (green box) to allow safe clearance of the mooring lines (four lines extending from platform).

Dana Morin
Director-Business Development
Fundy Tidal Inc.
Box 1209, Westport, Nova Scotia, B0V 1H0
Office: (902) 839.2078
Cell: (902) 790.3565
www.fundytidal.com

FORESTRY: Tory Forest Strategy Sells Rural New Brunswick and the Environment Down the River

Clearcut Formerly Known as Forest. The "B...
Clearcut (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Green Party of New Brunswick Press Release



The decision of the Alward government to permit 21% more clearcutting on Crown land this year will be ruinous for both rural communities and  wildlife, according to Green Party Leader David Coon. "This corporate forest plan sells rural New Brunswick and our environment down the river. It runs roughshod over the values and aspirations that Ne Brunswickers hold dear," said Coon.

The Green Party wants to create the conditions for an innovative and  diverse forest industry that suits our forest and sustains our rural  communities, but Coon says the Alward plan will make that impossible.

"This is the greatest give-away of forest resources to corporations in living memory," said Green Party leader David Coon. "Rural communities will be unable to rebuild their local forest economies because the Premier will give away their local natural resource base to corporate  mills in other regions. Local independent mills will become a thing of  the past and the market for independent woodlot owners will be  devastated. As for wildlife, entire populations will be eradicated  without adequate habitat in which to live," said Coon.

 "The current system has become corrupted," said David Coon. "We want to take operational control of the Crown lands back from the corporations  nd manage them for the public good, with decision-making authority given to local communities," said Coon.

Over the past decade, experts employed by the Department of Natural Resources determined that the 3.26 million cubic metres of spruce and  fir clearcut from Crown land was unsustainable and harvest levels needed  to be lowered to reflect the available wood supply. The only way harvest levels can be raised, is to allow clearcutting in the 26% of the  Crown lands where only selection harvesting had been permitted in order to sustain wildlife habitat and provide streamside buffers.

 "The long-term timber objectives of the Alward forest plan will dramatically increase herbicide spraying and convert much of the remaining natural forest on Crown lands to plantations," according to the Green Party leader.

 "Once again, we see the Alward government siding with money and power rather than with New Brunswickers," said Coon.