Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Oil, gas operator pays millions for Clean Air Act violations

News Feed
Monday, December 5, 2022

A recent agreement between an environmental group and an oil and gas company that dramatically cuts excess oil field pollution at a facility in southern New Mexico could be a model both for quicker resolutions to pollution violations and a legal road map for private groups looking to hold fossil fuel companies to account under the Clean Air Act.

A recent agreement between an environmental group and an oil and gas company that dramatically cuts excess oil field pollution at a facility in southern New Mexico could be a model both for quicker resolutions to pollution violations and a legal road map for private groups looking to hold fossil fuel companies to account under the Clean Air Act.



A recent agreement between an environmental group and an oil and gas company that dramatically cuts excess oil field pollution at a facility in southern New Mexico could be a model both for quicker resolutions to pollution violations and a legal road map for private groups looking to hold fossil fuel companies to account under the Clean Air Act.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

England declines EU's new water pollution standards

In a move that diverges from the European Union's latest environmental protections, England opts not to implement stricter regulations on water pollution from pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries.Helena Horton and Sandra Laville report for The Guardian.In short:The EU has updated its water treatment rules to include "polluter pays" principles, requiring industries to cover costs for chemical pollution cleanup.This update aims to significantly reduce micropollutants and nutrients in waterways, a measure England is not adopting.Northern Ireland and Scotland are moving towards adopting these or similar regulations, signaling a potential policy divergence within the UK.Key quote:"The UK must urgently mirror EU measures to make polluters pay to remedy the problems they cause, as well as to ban the use of harmful chemicals at source, before they harm our health and pollute our environment."— Chloe Alexander, senior campaigner at the CHEM TrustWhy this matters:Ingredients in medications and personal care products, often referred to as emerging contaminants, are increasingly detected in water bodies around the globe. These substances enter aquatic ecosystems through various pathways, including the discharge of treated and untreated sewage, runoff from agricultural lands and improper disposal of unused medications.A little bit of an anti-depressant makes wild guppies less active, camp out more under plants and freeze up for longer after something scares them, according to a 2017 study.

In a move that diverges from the European Union's latest environmental protections, England opts not to implement stricter regulations on water pollution from pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries.Helena Horton and Sandra Laville report for The Guardian.In short:The EU has updated its water treatment rules to include "polluter pays" principles, requiring industries to cover costs for chemical pollution cleanup.This update aims to significantly reduce micropollutants and nutrients in waterways, a measure England is not adopting.Northern Ireland and Scotland are moving towards adopting these or similar regulations, signaling a potential policy divergence within the UK.Key quote:"The UK must urgently mirror EU measures to make polluters pay to remedy the problems they cause, as well as to ban the use of harmful chemicals at source, before they harm our health and pollute our environment."— Chloe Alexander, senior campaigner at the CHEM TrustWhy this matters:Ingredients in medications and personal care products, often referred to as emerging contaminants, are increasingly detected in water bodies around the globe. These substances enter aquatic ecosystems through various pathways, including the discharge of treated and untreated sewage, runoff from agricultural lands and improper disposal of unused medications.A little bit of an anti-depressant makes wild guppies less active, camp out more under plants and freeze up for longer after something scares them, according to a 2017 study.

Industrial pollution is killing America’s Southern Deltas. Can they be saved?

North America’s largest Delta systems are among the most biodiverse places on Earth. But they also support a bustling and wealthy oil and gas industry.

The Mississippi River Delta and its smaller kin to the east, the Mobile-Tensaw Delta, are the largest systems of their kind in North America. Their floodplains, rivers, streams, and swamps stretch across the southeastern United States and support thousands of animal and plant species.  Collectively known as the Southern Deltas, they are among the most biodiverse places on earth.However, they are also critical economic centers that support the vast oil, gas, and chemical industries. A dizzying array of ships of all sizes can be seen traversing the busy waters of the lower Mississippi River, the end of what is essentially a superhighway between Minneapolis and the Gulf of Mexico. The Mobile-Tensaw delta, while smaller, is also a major regional hub of industry, allowing Mobile, Alabama’s port to become one of the fastest growing in the country.The delta’s industrial roles, which support hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs, are often at odds with those who want to protect their waters and the rich ecosystem they support.Can they co-exist? And what can be done to improve the health of the deltas?On World Water Day, Reckon spoke with Dr. Alex Kolker, a professor at Tulane University in New Orleans. He specializes in understanding how coastal systems of the Mississippi River Delta and along the Gulf Coast are impacted by climate change and human-caused pollution.Reckon: In this era of hyper-awareness about the environment and climate change, I was curious about the health of our two major delta systems. How are they doing?Dr. Kolker: Many deltas worldwide are retreating and losing land because of a vast array of human impacts, like climate change, sea level rise, and natural processes. The Mississippi River Delta in Louisiana is a prime example of that. Coastal Louisiana has lost about 2,000 square miles, or about 5,000 square kilometers worth of land, over the last 100 years. The ground under the Mississippi River Delta is sinking because so many canals were cut for oil and gas. It also doesn’t receive much restorative sediment from the Mississippi River because it’s behind levees, which is another big problem. Climate change is causing water levels to rise, preventing the protective wetlands in the deltas from doing their job.Can you explain the Mississippi Delta and why it has so much activity in its waters?[The Mississippi Delta] is an area where there were huge plantations, and a lot of people who live there today are descendants. Then there’s the Mississippi River Delta, which is the part that hits the Gulf of Mexico. When people like me talk about the Mississippi River Delta, they talk about the lower part of that system. Industrial facilities are in that general area, supporting oil and gas facilities south of Baton Rouge. You’ll see heavy shipping because that’s where the most intense parts of the petrochemical corridor are. About half of what moves up and down the lower Mississippi River is related to energy, oil, coal, gas, and heavy chemicals.As you mentioned, the Mississippi River Delta has a huge amount of industrial activity. At the same time, the Mobile Delta is surrounded by sources of pollution, from port activity to chemical plants upriver and a giant coal ash pond that feeds toxic chemicals into the groundwater. What’s the effect of pollution on people, our water and the precious ecosystems of the Southern Deltas?There are a lot of effects of chemical pollution in the Mississippi River Delta, in terms of chemistry in the water, but also the bigger impact on people’s health. These facilities produce a lot of air toxins–nitrogen oxide, volatile organic carbon, sulfur dioxide and other things that are harmful to people. They are respiratory hazards and carcinogens. That is a big concern for a lot of people in South Louisiana. That’s the stretch that people call “Cancer Alley.In terms of the water’s chemistry, there’s a large hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico that has lost much of its dissolved oxygen because of the nitrogen fertilizer that flows from farms upriver.It’s hard for fish and shellfish to breathe. Coal terminals are also along the lower Mississippi River, raising concerns that dust from those coal facilities could get into wetlands. They’re also building huge liquefied natural gas plants near wetlands in Louisiana, which is actually near a big coastal restoration project.Living in lower Alabama, I’ve spent a decent amount of time in the Mobile Delta and Mobile Bay. It’s quite disgusting, and I know from reading reports that much of the seagrass is dead, killed by pollution and a lack of sunlight. And I often wonder how effective our environmental laws, like the Clean Water Act of 1972, have been.I’m not a Clean Water Act specialist, but in the late 1960s and 70s, the Cuyahoga River around Cleveland would catch fire. That sort of thing doesn’t happen anymore, so I think these laws have had some effect, like reducing harmful chemicals in the water. Industry is now required to report pollutants. Whether the Clean Water Act has done enough is more of a policy question.You mentioned the importance of wetlands earlier. The Supreme Court decided they weren’t part of the Clean Water Act. What effect has that had on coastal communities?The previous interpretation of the Clean Water Act was that it could be used to prevent dredging, filling in, and other activities that would harm wetlands. Last year, the Supreme Court decided that wetlands don’t come under the Clean Water Act, significantly reducing the federal government’s ability to regulate them. That may be the most significant change to the delta ecosystems.Wetlands provide a lot of assets to coastal communities, including flood protection and habitat for many economically important species that people harvest, like crabs, shellfish, and fin fish Their lifecycles are tied to wetland marshes. And a lot of wading birds — herons and egrets and the like —  also call them home. Wetlands also buffer against storms and regulate water quality by filtering out harmful pollutants. These are big issues.What can we do to improve the situation of our Southern Deltas?There’s a lot that can be done. One thing that should be mentioned is that Louisiana has a significant plan to restore the Mississippi River Delta. It could involve taking sediment from onshore or offshore, putting it on the marshes, and partially diverting the flow of the Mississippi River. It’s a broad program that aims to spend about $1 billion annually for the next 50 years. About half of that is for restoration, and the rest is for coastal protection, which largely involves building levees. The idea is to reduce flooding impacts.Louisiana is doing it on a significant scale. It’s not going to be perfect by any means. If you look at the projections with climate change and sea level rise, the area will continue to lose land, and intense and damaging storms will continue. So, I don’t want to tell you it’s a panacea. However, the idea of combining storm, flood protection, and ecosystem restoration on a broad scale is something that other coastal communities should consider. If you look at the data, many of these plans will work if climate change is modest and stays at relatively moderate levels. But wetland restoration becomes very difficult if climate change accelerates and continues to accelerate.The data point is that if we want to save and preserve our southern deltas, we need to do something about climate change.

How the New E.P.A. Rules Affect Toyota and Their Hybrid Cars

The auto giant lobbied hard against tougher pollution rules. This week, the E.P.A.’s new rules proved favorable to hybrid technology, an area that Toyota dominates.

The breakfast at Toyota’s annual dealership gathering in Las Vegas last fall was an exclusive, invite-only affair, where attendees were told to cover their cellphone cameras with red stickers.Speaking was Stephen Ciccone, Toyota’s top lobbyist. He said the industry was facing an existential crisis — not because of the economy or fuel prices, but because of stronger tailpipe pollution limits being proposed in the United States. The rules were “bad for the country, bad for the consumer, and bad for the auto industry,” he said, according to a memo he later circulated among Toyota dealerships that was reviewed by The New York Times.“For more than two years, Toyota and our dealer partners have stood alone in the fight against unrealistic BEV mandates,” he wrote, using the acronym for battery-electric vehicles. “We have taken a lot of hits from environmental activists, the media, and some politicians. But we have not — and we will not — back down.”On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized tailpipe emissions rules that require car makers to meet tough new average emissions limits. The rules are some of the most significant aimed at fighting climate change in United States history.But the rules relaxed major elements of an earlier, more stringent proposal. In particular, the final regulations were favorable to hybrid cars, those that run both on gasoline and electricity — giving a bigger role to a market that Toyota dominates.Toyota, it appeared, had come out on top.Once a leader in clean cars, Toyota has cemented its role as the voice of caution against electrifying the auto industry too quickly, using its lobbying and public relations muscle to oppose a rapid shift that experts say is critical to fighting climate change.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

Biden Administration Announces Rules Aimed at Phasing Out Gas Cars

The regulations would require automakers to produce more electric vehicles and hybrids by gradually tightening limits on tailpipe pollution.

The Biden administration on Wednesday issued one of the most significant climate regulations in the nation’s history, a rule designed to ensure that the majority of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States are all-electric or hybrids by 2032.Nearly three years in the making, the new tailpipe pollution limits from the Environmental Protection Agency would transform the American automobile market. A record 1.2 million electric vehicles rolled off dealers’ lots last year, but they made up just 7.6 percent of total U.S. car sales, far from the 56 percent target under the new regulation. An additional 16 percent of new cars sold would be hybrids.Cars and other forms of transportation are, together, the largest single source of carbon emissions generated by the United States, pollution that is driving climate change and that helped to make 2023 the hottest year in recorded history. Electric vehicles are central to President Biden’s strategy to confront global warming, which calls for cutting the nation’s emissions in half by the end of this decade. But E.V.s have also become politicized and are becoming an issue in the 2024 presidential campaign.“Three years ago, I set an ambitious target: that half of all new cars and trucks sold in 2030 would be zero-emission,” said Mr. Biden in a statement. “Together, we’ve made historic progress. Hundreds of new expanded factories across the country. Hundreds of billions in private investment and thousands of good-paying union jobs. And we’ll meet my goal for 2030 and race forward in the years ahead.”The rule increasingly limits the amount of pollution allowed from tailpipes over time so that, by 2032, more than half the new cars sold in the United States would most likely be zero-emissions vehicles in order for carmakers to meet the standards.That would avoid more than seven billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions over the next 30 years, according to the E.P.A. That’s the equivalent of removing a year’s worth of all the greenhouse gases generated by the United States, the country that has historically pumped the most carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The regulation would provide nearly $100 billion in annual net benefits to society, according to the agency, including $13 billion of annual public health benefits thanks to improved air quality.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

All but 7 Countries on Earth Have Air Pollution Above WHO Standard

New research found that fewer than 10 percent of countries and territories met World Health Organization guidelines for particulate matter pollution last year.

Only 10 countries and territories out of 134 achieved the World Health Organization’s standards for a pervasive form of air pollution last year, according to air quality data compiled by IQAir, a Swiss company.The pollution studied is called fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, because it refers to solid particles less than 2.5 micrometers in size: small enough to enter the bloodstream. PM2.5 is the deadliest form of air pollution, leading to millions of premature deaths each year.“Air pollution and climate change both have the same culprit, which is fossil fuels,” said Glory Dolphin Hammes, the CEO of IQAir’s North American division.The World Health Organization sets a guideline that people shouldn’t breathe more than 5 micrograms of fine particulate matter per cubic meter of air, on average, throughout a year. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed tightening its standard from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter.The few oases of clean air that meet World Health Organization guidelines are mostly islands, as well as Australia and the northern European countries of Finland and Estonia. Of the non-achievers, where the vast majority of the human population lives, the countries with the worst air quality were mostly in Asia and Africa.Where some of the dirtiest air is foundThe four most polluted countries in IQAir’s ranking for 2023 — Bangladesh, Pakistan, India and Tajikistan — are in South and Central Asia.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.