Talk:Environment

The ghost of nuclear waste past is about to visit us again. Maybe Larry Anderson, formerly of the DEQ can torment Khosrow Semnani into being stricken with conscience once again. Har Har!

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- A shipment of five-hundred tons of uranium-contaminated Japanese soil is headed for a mill in Utah's southeastern desert.

The International Uranium's White Mesa mill, south of Blanding, Utah, is set to accept the shipment, which is considered "ore" for processing by government officials.

Utah's environmental activists fear, however, that the shipment could be a signal that the state is destined to become an international dumping ground for radioactive waste -- not just a national one.

But Harold Roberts, with the Canadian-based International Uranium, stresses that the 319 cubic yards of soil is natural ore, not contaminated waste tailings.

But some insist the tailings are waste, no matter the regulatory definitions.

For more information about the White Mesa Mill visit Salt Lake City Weekly

Moved from Environment

I'd like to suggest this Op/Ed from the NYT for discussion. Enjoying the Bush rants are optional; for PA purposes, please consider the energy/environmental path of this argument, and its potential impact on a local, state and national level. Unfortunatly, it is a Times Select (membership req'd) article, so I can't link, but it is well worth the effort. Bush's Waterlogged Halo By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Published: September 21, 2005

Starter questions

Right now, there isn't anything on the main Environment page. I'm not sure what to do about that, because the pages seem to be meant to hold Pete Ashdown's positions on issues, and it doesn't seem like a good idea for me to just make some up for him.

Maybe I should say he's pro-dolphin. Everybody loves those little scamps, right?

• How serious do you consider the global warming issue? What steps should we as a country take to curb greenhouse gas emissions? Should we sign the Kyoto Treaty?

• Are you in favor of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?

• Do you favor or oppose President Clinton's decision to set aside the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument?

Clarification: As Pete noted in the recent addition, the Monument was done over the objection of the governor and representatives of Utah. The action probably turned a lot of Utahns against the environmental movement, but I'm hard pressed to think of what other ways that the creation of the monument actually harmed the environment. Perhaps by setting aside the wrong areas, it might have pushed economic development into other sensitive areas. But I can't come up with specifics.

--Bryce 16:24, 10 October 2005 (MDT)

• What is your opinion of recent legislation to "fix" the Endangered Species Act?

• Are you in favor of dolphins?

Environment 1.0

I'm not sure it's safe to attribute the increase in autism to any specific cause. Lots of options have been proposed, including mercury in immunizations, overall environmental degradation, looser diagnostic criteria, etc.

Regarding waterfowl: Two species of ducks living on the shores of the Great Salt Lake have been declared too toxic to eat. I guess the silver lining here is that Utah's outdoorsmen will complain about this. (I'm not sure how long the Trib will leave access open to the article)

I think the point about the economics vs. health tradeoffs is important. It seems to me that when business types talk about loosening regulations in order to "grow the economy", they don't take into account the costs that they're simply externalizing. Even if we decided to be cold-hearted bean counters, and weigh the costs of environmental protections against the decreased productivity and increased need for medical services, a lot of environmental regs come off looking pretty good. If we value human life and happiness even more than that, then even more regulations make sense. I think you should also point out that you are willing to explore proposals to streamline environmental regulations and make them more sensible. That's something people on both sides of the aisle should want.

The April 21st edition of The Economist had some interesting articles about a new way of thinking about environmentalism. Just one example: in New York, the state was able to save billions in water purification costs, by simply protecting undeveloped areas that were already purifying the water that passed through them. Developers look at empty land and think its economic value is zero until they can come along and put up a strip mall. But land that is "doing nothing" is often doing quite a bit. Anyhow, it's a good read.

I don't like that Utah is the nation's dumping ground, but you have to admit that we're better suited for it than, say, Rhode Island. From your writeup, it sounds like your primary proposals for ending that sorry state of affairs involving things like alternative energy, that would reduce the amount of waste being produced. I can support that.

==Bryce 16:25, 10 October 2005 (MDT)

Foreign N-waste arrives in Utah

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3155333

According to Judy Fahys

Ore from Japan: Some worry Utah's limited authority to regulate the material may make it an international repository

Truckloads of radioactive ore from Japan began arriving this week at International Uranium Corp.'s mill in San Juan County, stirring up questions about Utah's future as a worldwide repository for waste.

   It turns out that the state of Utah has no ban on radioactive material from foreign sources, nor any special oversight of it. And even the federal government appears limited in its authority to stop waste at the nation's borders.
   The lack of controls concerns many Utahns, given that the state has one uranium mill, the nation's only privately owned and operated landfill for low-level radioactive waste and a proposed storage site for high-level nuclear waste.
  State Rep. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, and Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said the question of foreign waste never came up during their two-year study of the industry as co-chairmen of the legislative Waste Task Force.
   Urquhart said the Japanese shipments may have caught the attention of policy makers.
   "It raises a lot of questions," he said. And one is, "Do we want to be the dumping ground for the world?"
   Said Bramble: "We probably ought to have that discussion" about accepting foreign waste.
   Utah's concerns aren't unique. Five years ago Washington state tried unsuccessfully to call for more state and federal control of foreign shipments to its Hanford landfill. Then-Gov. Gary Locke appealed to the Clinton White House. The Democratic governor said foreign waste should be carefully monitored and regulated and, "at the very least . . . should require the consent of a competent authority within our country.
   "Yet, in reviewing this particular situation, the state of Washington became aware that neither we nor the federal government has the authority to ban the importation of this type of nuclear waste," Locke wrote in his Aug. 2, 2000 letter. "The state of Washington or any other state for that matter, should not be vulnerable to the importation of foreign radioactive waste."
  No federal action resulted.
   In Utah, how regulators deal with nuclear material - domestic or foreign - depends on technical standards written into each operating license, said Dane Finerfrock, director of the Utah Division of Radiation Control.
   As long as companies meet the conditions of the license, such as packaging and radioactivity levels, the state would sign off on any shipment regardless of its origin, Finerfrock said. He added that the state has no authority over the proposed Private Fuel Storage high-level waste site in Tooele County.
   Sue Martin, spokeswoman for Private Fuel Storage LLC, said the federal license granted last month by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not cover waste from outside U.S. borders.
   "That's what we stated in our license, that the purpose of our facility is for commercial spent fuel from our power plants in the U.S.," she said. "It's never been our purpose to take foreign fuel or nuclear material from the military." 

Envirocare did not respond to requests for comment about the foreign waste. The site has accepted more than 166 million cubic feet of radioactive and hazardous waste in 17 years. Company officials have said Envirocare has not taken foreign contracts, and, according to Finerfrock, the company told the state it won't take foreign waste.

   The federal government would have to license any waste that might come into the country. Its main concerns also would be technical, such as whether the disposal site is licensed to take such waste and whether the waste could be used for a nuclear bomb.
   Janice Owens, who reviews import and export licenses for the NRC, said her agency would consult with state regulators and seek public comment on import requests.
   "I don't know if we would be able to approve a license if there were strong [philosophical] objections," she said.
   Ron Hochstein, president of International Uranium, noted that the waste from Japan is ore that is allowed under a general license that used to be administered by the NRC but is now overseen by the state.
   "There was always communication between us and the state with this," he said.
   Earlier this month, shortly after reports surfaced in Japan and Washington state about the shipment, state regulators asked Hochstein's company to send more details, such as IUC's technical assessment that confirmed the Japanese material was ore and not recyclable waste for which IUC would have to get special permissions from the state and the federal government.
   "It's very low radioactivity," he said. "It's no different than the stuff that people used to bring to us in their pickups" or that used to roll through downtown Salt Lake City on the way to the defunct Vitro mill in South Salt Lake.
   Activist Steve Erickson, who obtained e-mails and other paperwork on the Japanese shipment from state regulators, said the state showed interest only after press reports.
   Those records also show that a state consultant had contacted the NRC about "possible importation of [low-level radioactive waste] from the State of South Australia," presumably to Envirocare, which is the only facility in the state licensed to take such material.
   "The state of Utah needs to flex its regulatory muscles because they seem a tad flabby at this point," Erickson said.
   "IUC has been for a decade the invisible dump in this state," he added, "and that has got to end."

I'm new to the Wasatch area...

from New York city, and I am appalled by the smog here. I'm aware of the 'inversion' effect, but most often I've heard it used as a sort of excuse for pollution. I haven't come across a single person in SLC and Utah County (where I work), who isn't pretty disgusted or even ashamed of the air pollution here (and they are always apologetic to this outsider). Therefore, I think a local plan of action would go far with respect to the yellow haze that makes this valley far less spectacular than it deserves to be. I've read that SLC prescribes to the Kyoto accord, but I believe more needs ot be accomplished and a strong position about how to clean up local air would go far in voters' minds. Thanks!

-M. Adolph, SLC

Be fair, the temperature inversionis a natural phenomena that traps cold air in the "bowl" of the valley. It becomes stagnant, and all of our pollution is trapped. It's not pleasant, but humans are not entirely to blame. Even the Natives called this "The valley of the smoke" before white settlers even came here.--Jdjonsson 22:57, 5 December 2005 (MST)

However, the inversion isn't the problem. It's the pollution levels that steadily increase because of the inversion. The Division of Air Quality monitors the levels of pollution in our air. Last year, you will see the levels of Sulfur Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, and Particulate matter pollution rise during inversions. These high levels of pollution (not the inversion itself, mind you, but the pollution) are caused by human activities such as driving cars, power plants, wood-burning furnaces, etc. We need to think of ways to decrease the level of pollution during the inversions. The question is, though, what can the Federal Government do? --Brett

I don't think there's anything the Fed can do about nature and the fact that we have temperature inversions. The poor air quality and the fact that it's getting worse from winter to winter is largely a function of population and industrial growth. The inversion simply happens, the air quality during that time is entirely down to our local emissions. Federal Air Quality Standards can't take our inversions into account. If Salt Lake County wants to reduce emissions during the inversion months, I think it's entirely a local issue.--Jdjonsson 16:58, 6 December 2005 (MST)

Set Yourself Apart

As an aside, my parents are both pretty solidly republican, but one of the few issues they feel is important enough to switch sides for is environmental protection. I don't know how you feel about these things, but in general I'm pretty fed up with the whole "Well, the people out in (insert rural area here) live there, so they should be able to do what they want with Federal lands" argument. BLM/FS/NPS lands don't belong to any one group, and Grand Staircase-Escalante belongs no more to me in Ogden than it does to someone in Honolulu, Atlanta, Boston, or Tropic. Part of the reason we have managed to preserve so many amazing places in the West is because of this national ownership. I'm going to go ahead and assume that this isn't a very popular view, but I figure the comments section is the place to blather about this stuff.

Also, I think the various wilderness study areas in Utah have waited long enough to be recognized. Sure, not all of them are equally worthy, but at least the best few candidates should be approved. Official designation draws tourists to the state, who are often un-aware of anything beyond the famous national parks. For example, for all the bitching and moaning about Grand Staircase-Escalante, I personally hadn't visited before the designation, and I doubt I'd be answering questions about the backpacking opportunities presented there from as far away as Europe if it remained a random BLM area.

Industrial waste and air pollution needs to be addressed, not just here but abroad. I hear plenty of talk about how industrializing countries should use the latest technologies to begin with and avoid the unnecessary step of unchecked pollution from factories and power plants, and it seems like it would be worth it for the US to at least distribute the technology free of charge to these nations (China and India come to mind first, but plenty of Latin American nations could benefit as well). Of course, if we required our own polluters to upgrade instead of grandfathering them in while at the same time subsidizing their profits, that would be good too.

You should definitely try to set yourself apart from Hatch in this area. I realize you know technology, and I think that's great and absolutely something we need in the Senate, but it would be helpful to have at least a few strong areas of differentiation.

The key word here is cooperation. Bruce Babbitt recently stated that the method they used for declaring the Grand Staircase-Escalante a monument was not the best. Clinton could have made some friends by working with locals and declaring it in Utah rather than doing it in Arizona with no cooperation. I don't think that locals throughout Utah are vehemently against wilderness protections, I think they are angry that it happens without their input. I've been told that some areas have been locked up "under study" for over 15 years. Working with locals and perhaps giving them some benefit to closing down local extraction industries would go a long way. As far as what I've been told by people in Utah, they've had no cooperation under Clinton and it hasn't been any better under Bush. The common denominator here is our Utah representation.

Cracking down on polluters is a big priority for me, not only industrial, but automobiles. With an increasing list of fish and fowl we can not eat due to mercury content, I think this is an issue that a majority of Utahns are interested in seeing resolved.--pashdown 10:25, 6 December 2005 (MST)

I'm assuming that if you had been here in the Sixties to see how bad the Land Use Planning Initiative got slaughtered at the polls you would have a different view of the viabilitiy of working with locals on any kind of resource preservation. Even Matheson sells out to the widespread development crowd, so you know that there must really be no local constitutency committed to setting aside the absolutely maximum quantity of nice places for future generations.

As for Clinton favoring Arizona over Utah, politics is all about the winner taking the spoils. Utah can't be totally lopsided, and expect any kind of parity from the side that it continually votes against. Balanced states get wooed from both parties, but Utah gets screwed by the Democrats, and mostly taken for granted by the Republicans.

Global warming & the Kyoto Protocol

What's your position on the Kyoto Protocol and global warming? Global warming is the most significant environmental challenge that the world will face in the coming years and it is a highly divisive issue. - Aaron 05:43, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Utah environmental issues (from the Sierra Club)

The Utah Chapter of the Sierra Club has a web page about its priority issues. Each is given a brief description and a few links. This might be a good source for topics to be added to the Environment page. Jim Lane 16:42, 29 March 2006 (MST)

Global Warming

Global warming isn't really a divisive issue -- not among competent scientists, anyway. The Bush administration is pushing the false idea that scientists are divided -- but something like 88% agree that global warming is real -- and real serious! Trouble is that too many Americans spend too much time watching American Idol and Law and Order and not enough time reading or watching good information like PBS to understand what's actually going on.--4.228.207.82 21:42, 30 March 2006 (MST)ldalton