Beijing smog

Beijing hit with blanket of poisonous smog

Chinese capital engulfed with air pollution 26 times above levels considered safe by world authorities.

al-Jazeera,

16 January, 2014

Beijing has been enveloped by a dense grey smog as the capital experienced the season's first wave of extremely dangerous pollution, with toxic particles registering more than two dozen times the level considered safe.

The air took on an acrid odour, and many of the city's commuters wore industrial strength face masks as they hurried to work.

"I couldn't see the tall buildings across the street this morning," said a Beijing traffic co-ordinator. "The smog has gotten worse in the last two to three years. I often cough, and my nose is always irritated. But what can you do? I drink more water to help my body discharge the toxins."

A monitoring post at the US Embassy in Beijing recorded pollution levels about 26 times higher than those considered safe by the World Health Organisation.

The city's air quality is often poor, especially in winter when stagnant weather patterns combine with an increase in coal-burning.

In recent years, China has beefed up regulations and pledged financial resources to fight pollution.

Beijing authorities said the haze on Thursday has reduced the visibility to several hundred metres and that the severe pollution is likely to continue through Friday.

China's pollution

Pollution Threatens China's Food Security

Zero Hedge,

2 January, 2014

Submitted by Shannon Tiezzi via The Diplomat,

A Reuters report this week noted that nearly 3.33 million hectares (eight million acres) of Chinese farmland are too polluted to grow crops. The article, which was re-posted by the state-run China Daily news site, quoted Wang Shiyuan, China’s vice minister of land and resources. Wang says that the government is determined to address the issue of polluted farmland, and will commit “tens of billions of yuan” each year to help return the land to a usable state.

Food security is a major concern for Chinese leaders, and worries over this issue already had the potential to severely slow down other planned reforms such as urbanization. The announcement on China’s pollution levels further complicates the balance of preserving farmland and speeding up urbanization. Wang Shiyuan noted that the amount of polluted land represents nearly 2 percent of the country’s arable land, which is not something the Chinese government can ignore.  China’s per capita arable land area is already less than half of the world average — the country simply can’t afford to lose any more land to pollution.

China’s government wants to ensure enough arable land is left reserved for farming, and the large swath of polluted fields cuts into that amount. Xinhua reports that China’s arable land survey counted about 135.4 million hectares (334.6 million acres) of farmland — but after removing from that count land reserved for “forest and pasture restoration” as well as land too polluted for crop-growing, the “actual available arable land was just slightly above the government’s red-line” of preserving 120 million hectares (296 million acres) of usable farm land. In other words, pollution is presenting a dangerous threat to one of the government’s highest priorities.

This presents a tough choice for Chinese leaders: let the land lie farrow and risk disrupting food supplies, or allow crops to be grown on tainted soil. Wang’s remarks show the government is leaning towards the former. Tainted crops have already caused scares among China’s citizens. A report by Guangzhou in May found that nearly half the rice in the cities’ restaurants had excessive levels of the heavy metal cadmium. The city’s residents were outraged when the report was published.  The rice in Guangzhou was linked to polluted plots in Hunan province, which produces 11 percent of China’s total rice each year. Caixin published an article arguing that cover-ups by both local and provincial governments allowed the problem to spread before it exploded into the public consciousness in late spring 2013.

In a way, Wang’s public report could actually be good news for environmental advocates.  For one, it shows that the central government is taking the problem seriously, and might be taking steps to increase transparency in the tracking and reporting of soil and water pollution. Even more importantly, food security is a non-negotiable for China’s government and pollution becoming a serious impediment to ensuring a steady supply of crops. Now China’s leaders will be more willing to make the hard choices necessary to clean up the land and water pollution in China’s rural areas. This might mean setting strict new pollution limits for businesses, or even closing down factories that operate close to farmland.

Unfortunately, however, the food security crisis could also negatively impact the environment. Chinadialogue reported back in November that the government was letting reforestation subsidies (money paid to farmers who plant trees on their land) expire over food security concerns. Wang’s remarks seem to promise that some land is being kept in reserve for reforestation and the creation of pasture land. If China’s arable land continues to creep down towards the “red line,” it will be very tempting for the government to reclaim this land for agriculture — which Chinadialogue argues will speed up desertification, putting China at risk in other ways.

Climate change in 2013

Climate change by the numbers: The worst is yet to come

CO2 levels went through the roof in 2013, as the world tried — and mostly failed — to slow down warming

LINDSAY ABRAMS

Salon

30 December, 2013

“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” President Obama announced back in January at his second-term inauguration. Thus began another year of steady climate change, continued pollution of the atmosphere and half-hearted attempts at changing the world’s dire trajectory.

By many measures, 2013 wasn’t particularly extreme: it it wasn’t the hottest we’ve ever seen; its storms, by and large, weren’t the most devastating. Much of what occurred can best be seen as a sign of things to come. Droughts, believed to be exacerbated by climate change, will become more widespread. Wildfires are expected to get bigger, longer and smokier by 2050. Twelve months, after all, is but a short moment in Earth’s history. Only in the future, looking back, will we be able to recognize the true significance of many of this year’s big numbers:

7: Where 2013 ranks among the warmest years in history, according to the World Meteorological Association. Tied with 2003, the ranking is based on the year’s first nine months, during which average temperatures were 0.86°F above the 1960-1991 global average.

395.5: The average concentration levels of CO2, in parts per million (ppm), observed in the atmosphere through November.

400: The ”milestone,” in parts per million of atmospheric CO2, that was temporarily crossed in May. It was the first time carbon levels crossed that boundary in 55 years of record-keeping — and possibly in 3 million years of history on Earth.

95: Percent certainty with which IPCC scientists say climate change is caused by human activity, a confidence level up from 90 percent in 1997.

1,100: Amount by which EPA regulations proposed in September would limit emissions from new coal-fired power plants, in pounds of CO2 per hour. The average plant currently emits CO2 at a rate of 1,800 pounds per hour.

25: The factor by which the concentration of PM 2.5 — the part of air pollution most harmful to human health — exceeded the amount considered safe in the U.S. when Beijing’s first “airpocalypse” occurred in January

1,000: Air pollution levels in the Chinese city of Harbin, in micrograms per cubic meter of PM 2.5, during October’s smog emergency. According to the World Health Organization, it shouldn’t exceed 20; anything higher than 300 is considered hazardous.

8: Age of girl in Harbin who contracted lung cancer.

3.8: Percent by which Japan said it would try to reduce its emissions by 2020, down from its  previous pledge of 25 percent.

1.97 million: The annual minimum extent of Arctic sea ice, in square miles. Melting this year wasn’t as severe as it was in 2012, but the remaining area was still 17 percent below average — and the sixth lowest on record.

3.2: Current average sea level rise, in millimeters per year. Sea levels reached a record high in March.

104.6: The average country-wide temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit, on January 7 in Australia — the continent’s hottest day on record, in its hottest month on record.

121.3: The temperature reading, in degrees Fahrenheit, in the South Australian town of Moomba on January 12.

90: Percent confidence with which researchers at the University of Melbourne concluded, in July, that “human influences on the Australian atmosphere had dramatically increased the odds of extreme temperatures.”

129.2: The temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit, recorded in California’s Death Valley on June 30, setting a record for the hottest temperature ever recorded on Earth for that month.

2: The weather emergency level declared by officials in China during this summer’s heat wave — a number normally reserved for typhoons and floods.

1.7 billion: The estimated cost, in USD, of New Zealand’s drought — its worst in 30 years.

10: The number of consecutive months during which over half of the contiguous U.S. experienced moderate or severe drought, which finally fell below 50 percent in mid-April 2013.

72: Percent of land area in 10 Western states in drought conditions after a record-breaking heat wave in June.

3.95: Inches of rain that fell from January to November in San Francisco. When the final numbers come in, it’s likely that California will be found to have had its driest year on record.

257,000: Acres of land burned by the California Rim Fire, the biggest wildfire in Sierra’s recorded history, which caused over $50 million in damage. It was caused by a number of factors, drought and abnormal seasons included.

5.9 – 7.9: The amount of rain, in inches, that normally falls over two and a half months and instead pummeled central Europe between May 30 and June 1. Floodwaters in Germany rose to their highest levels in over 500 years.

1.3: The width, in miles, of the tornado that struck Moore, Oklahoma on May 20. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., caused controversy when he invoked the storm during a speech criticizing climate deniers. While researchers cannot be sure there was a link between climate change and the twister, they believe that a warming planet may host more frequent, stronger storms.

2.6: The width, in miles, of the tornado that struck El Reno, Oklahoma ten days later. It was the widest ever measured on Earth.

20 billion: Cost, in dollars, of plans laid out by NYC Mayor Bloomberg in June to make infrastructure improvements, including floodwalls and storm barriers, in preparation for the effects of climate change.

6,100: The most recent death count from Typhoon Haiyan, which officially became the deadliest storm in Philippines’ history. Bodies continue to be recovered.

132: The number of countries that walked out of the U.N. climate talks in Warsaw in protest over rich nations’ refusal to entertain the idea of compensation for extreme climate events

90: The number of global companies that together account for two-thirds of greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report in the journal Climactic Change.

7 billion: The number of “key individuals” responsible for climate change. The Onion, as always, is spot on.

Fracking chemicals

ANOTHER generation of hormone-disrupting chemicals

Hormone-Disrupting Chemicals Found At Fracking Sites Linked To Cancer, Infertility: Study

Huffington Post,

20 December, 2013

Hormone-disrupting chemicals linked to cancer, infertility and a slew of other health problems have been found in water samples collected at and near hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," sites in Colorado, according to a new study published in the journal Endocrinology this week.

Researchers say they found elevated levels of these chemicals -- known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) -- in surface water and groundwater samples collected in the state's Garfield County, a fracking hotspot with more than 10,000 natural gas wells.

Water samples taken from the Colorado River, a drainage basin for the region, were also found to have significantly higher-than-normal levels of EDCs, the researchers said.

EDCs, which have the ability to interfere with normal hormone action, have been linked to a number of health issues. Last year, the World Health Organization issued a report highlighting the health risks associated with the chemicals, including cancer, infertility and impaired neural and immune function. Previous studies have also suggested that EDCs may have adverse effects on the reproductive system in both women and men.

"With fracking on the rise, populations may face greater health risks from increased endocrine-disrupting chemical exposure," Susan Nagel, a veteran endocrinologist at the University of Missouri School of Medicine, told the Los Angeles Times. Nagel was the lead author of the recent study on fracking and EDCs.

In 2010 and again in 2012, Nagel and a team of researchers collected several water samples at five natural gas sites in Garfield County, where fracking wastewater spills are known to have occurred in the last few years. The researchers then tested the samples for four different classes of EDCs. "Of the 39 unique water samples, 89 percent, 41 percent, 12 percent, and 46 percent exhibited estrogenic, anti-estrogenic, androgenic, and anti-androgenic activities, respectively," the report says. The team also gathered water samples from the Colorado river, as well as from areas in Garfield County that are located a significant distance away from natural gas wells. Other samples came from an area in Missouri where there is no fracking.

The researchers said water samples collected from the spill sites and the Colorado river had significantly higher levels of EDCs than those gathered from the control sites in Garden County and Missouri.

Water can contain small amounts of estrogenic substances naturally. However, "Nagel said that although estrogenic substances can be found naturally occurring in water, she did not know of similar sources of anti-estrogenic or anti-androgenic chemicals," the Times reports.

Troublingly, Nagel told The Huffington Post that the people living in the areas of Garfield County where the samples were taken all primarily get their water from local wells. This means that some residents in the area may very well be consuming water laden with these higher levels of EDCs.

"This is a canary in a coal mine that we need to pay attention to," Nagel told the HuffPost of the findings. "And it is absolutely a cause for concern."

Nagel added, however, that more research needs to be conducted to confirm the link between the EDCs found in the samples and fracking.

In their study, the researchers did not test their samples for specific fracking chemicals. Nagel said that a similar study should be conducted again, but with a larger sample size.

Fracking is a process in which millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals are blasted underground to break apart rock and release oil and gas. "The process is exempt from some regulations that are part of the Safe Drinking Water Act, and energy companies do not have to disclose the chemicals they use if they consider that information a trade secret," the Times writes.

In 2011, however, a Congressional report revealed a list of some 750 chemicals and compounds that are used for fracking. A ProPublica report said at the time that the list includes "29 chemicals that are either known or possible carcinogens or are regulated by the federal government because of other risks to human health."

Nagel told the HuffPost that researchers have since found more than 100 known or suspected EDCs in this list, as well.

With billions of dollars on the line, fracking -- and its impact on the environment and public health -- has been a contentious and controversial issue for years. Gas and oil lobbyists maintain that the practice is environmentally sound and perfectly safe (an industry lobbyist told the Times that Nagel's study was "inflammatory"), while environmental groups including Food and Water Watch and the Sierra Club have continued to sound the alarm on fracking's possible effects on our health and that of our planet.

Part of the problem is that studies looking into fracking's effects on public health remain inconclusive and preliminary. Still, there has been no shortage of anecdotal evidence of fracking's impact.

Earlier this year, for instance, it was reported that residents in Bokoshe, Okla., had filed a class-action suit against gas companies that had been fracking in the area. Oklahoma's News 6 reported at the time that "hundreds of millions of gallons" of fracking wastewater had been discharged at Bokoshe. Residents say this activity has triggered a spate of health issues, including cancer, in the town.