In the wake of yesterday’s explosion at a natural gas plant in Connecticut, Caroline Howe at Its Getting Hot in Here makes a good point:

Fossil fuels are not safe. They are not safe for our planet, they are not safe for our communities, and they are not safe for the workers inside of their power plants. This is not the first power plant explosion, this will not be the last. It is time for America to commit to a clean and safe energy economy – where our friends and neighbors can work in green jobs that give good wages and safe working environments. My heart and prayers are with the workers at the Kleen Energy Plant and with their families — and with the future of our nation to not face such a tragedy again.

Greenhouse gas emissions aside, here are a few recent environmental problems and public health concerns associated with generating electricity from coal, nuclear and natural gas:

• Yesterday — Middletown Power Plant Explosion Caused By Gas Leak, Officials Say: “Early reports were that a natural gas leak could have caused a devastating explosion Sunday morning that killed two and injured as many as a dozen more at a power plant being built south of the city on the Connecticut River.”
• Last week — Radiation Levels Spike Near Vt. Nuke Plant; Leak Source Not Yet Found: “Levels of radioactive tritium mushroomed Thursday in a new monitoring well at the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor, an indication the leak was coming from water that runs through the reactor itself, according to the Department of Health.  These are very high concentrations,” said William Irwin, radiological health chief for the Department of Health, who was at the reactor Thursday. “We’re not dealing with a minor system. It’s an important source that needs to be quickly found.”
• Last week — The EPA released “engineering assessments of 40 more coal ash impoundments showing they have the ‘high’ or ’significant’ potential to cause loss of human life, environmental damage, or damage to infrastructure.”
• 9 months ago — 8 Firefighters, 1 Gas Employee Burned In Natural Gas Explosion: “Eight firefighters and a gas company worker were injured in a natural gas explosion at a strip mall in Forestville, Maryland on Thursday afternoon. Despite being caught in the violent explosion, only two of the injured remain hospitalized.”
• 13 months ago — TVA spilled 5.4 million cubic yards of toxic coal ash in Eastern Tennessee. “A test of river water near the spill showed elevated levels of lead and thallium, which can cause birth defects and nervous and reproductive system disorders”
• Natural gas drilling has contaminated the water in several states.
• Coal mining releases methane, carbon monoxide, soot, copper lead and mercury at levels known to pose risks to human health.

And here are some recent environmental problems and public health concerns associated with generating electricity from solar, wind and geothermal:

• …
• …
• Actually, there are no environmental problems or public health concerns associated with generating electricity from wind, solar and geothermal sources.

Just something to keep in mind when you hear people talk about ‘cleaner burning natural gas,’ ‘clean coal,’ and ’safe nuclear power.’

Update — Senator Lautenberg has questions:

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said Monday that a fatal explosion at an unfinished natural gas-fired power plant in Connecticut over the weekend underscores safety concerns about a proposed natural gas pipeline in New Jersey.

An explosion Sunday at the Kleen Energy Systems plant in Middletown, Connecticut killed at least five workers.

“This tragic incident reminds us that natural gas, while cleaner burning than other fossil fuels, comes with safety risks. The explosion raises a red flag about the construction of a natural gas line that would run through New Jersey primarily for the benefit of New York,” Lautenberg said in a prepared statement.

NY Times:

Exhaust from cars and trucks exacerbates asthma in children and may cause new cases as well as other respiratory illnesses and heart problems resulting in deaths, an independent institute that focuses on vehicle-related air pollution has concluded.

The report, to be issued on Wednesday by the nonprofit Health Effects Institute, analyzed 700 peer-reviewed studies conducted around the world on varying aspects of motor vehicle emissions and health. It found “evidence of a causal relationship,” but not proof of one, between pollution from vehicles and impaired lung function and accelerated hardening of the arteries.

It said there was “strong evidence” that exposure to traffic helped cause variations in heart rate and other heart ailments that result in deaths. But among the many studies that evaluated death from heart problems, some did not separate stress and noise from air pollution as a cause, it said.

The executive summary and a press release can be found here.

Press release via EPA (H/T RLMiller at The Seminal).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency today proposed the strictest health standards to date for smog. Smog, also known as ground-level ozone, is linked to a number of serious health problems, ranging from aggravation of asthma to increased risk of premature death in people with heart or lung disease. Ozone can even harm healthy people who work and play outdoors. The agency is proposing to replace the standards set by the previous administration, which many believe were not protective enough of human health.

“EPA is stepping up to protect Americans from one of the most persistent and widespread pollutants we face. Smog in the air we breathe poses a very serious health threat, especially to children and individuals suffering from asthma and lung disease. It dirties our air, clouds our cities, and drives up our health care costs across the country,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Using the best science to strengthen these standards is a long overdue action that will help millions of Americans breathe easier and live healthier.”

The agency is proposing to set the “primary” standard, which protects public health, at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million (ppm) measured over eight hours. Children are at the greatest risk from ozone, because their lungs are still developing, they are most likely to be active outdoors, and they are more likely than adults to have asthma. Adults with asthma or other lung diseases, and older adults are also sensitive to ozone.

EPA is also proposing to set a separate “secondary” standard to protect the environment, especially plants and trees. This seasonal standard is designed to protect plants and trees from damage occurring from repeated ozone exposure, which can reduce tree growth, damage leaves, and increase susceptibility to disease.

In September 2009 Administrator Jackson announced that EPA would reconsider the existing ozone standards, set at 0.075 ppm in March 2008. As part of its reconsideration, EPA conducted a review of the science that guided the 2008 decision, including more than 1,700 scientific studies and public comments from the 2008 rulemaking process. EPA also reviewed the findings of the independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which recommended standards in the ranges proposed today.

Depending on the level of the final standard, the proposal would yield health benefits between $13 billion and $100 billion. This proposal would help reduce premature deaths, aggravated asthma, bronchitis cases, hospital and emergency room visits and days when people miss work or school because of ozone-related symptoms. Estimated costs of implementing this proposal range from $19 billion to $90 billion.

Ground-level ozone forms when emissions from industrial facilities, power plants, landfills and motor vehicles react in the sun.

EPA will take public comment for 60 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register. The agency will hold three public hearings on the proposal: Feb. 2, 2010 in Arlington, Va. and in Houston; and Feb. 4, 2010 in Sacramento.

Physician’s for Social Responsibility:

Physicians for Social Responsibility has released a groundbreaking medical report, “Coal’s Assault on Human Health,” which takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted by those pollutants on three major body organ systems: the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, and the nervous system. The report also considers coal’s contribution to global warming, and the health implications of global warming.

Here is the report:

psr-coal-fullreport –

KTVU:

A mile-long sheen of bunker fuel oil drifted from a tanker anchored in the still waters of the San Francisco Bay Friday, triggering an emergency response by the U.S. Coast Guard, authorities said.

A Coast Guard spokesman said the agency got a report at around 8 a.m. reporting the sheen of drifting oil and tarballs streaming from the rear of Panamanian registered tanker Dubai Star that was anchored 2 1/1 miles south of the Bay Bridge.

Petty Officer 3rd Class Melissa Lee said a massive response was under way.

“The leak occurred when they were transferring bunker fuel (from a barge to the tanker),” she said. “We are evaluating the situation and have resources responding. “

Friends of the Earth has a petition calling for the use of bunker fuel to be discontinued:

Bunker fuel is a toxic, asphalt-like substance that is causing air pollution and global warming, harming marine life, and damaging human health and the environment. I join with Friends of the Earth in calling on Congress to require the cruise and shipping industries to end their use of this dirty fuel and transition to cleaner alternatives.

Friends of the Earth and Clean Air Task Force submit the following written testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee last year:

Trust for America’s Health:

The report finds that only five states have published a strategic climate change plan that includes a public health response. This includes planning for health challenges and emergencies expected to develop from natural disasters, pollution, and infectious diseases as temperatures and sea levels rise.

The report examines U.S. planning for changing health threats posed by climate change, such as heat-related sickness, respiratory infections, natural disasters, changes to the food supply, and infectious diseases carried by insects.

The five states with public health response plans included in their larger climate change plans are California, Maryland, New Hampshire, Virginia, and Washington. Twenty-eight states have published strategic climate change plans that do not include a public health response, and seventeen states and the District of Columbia have not published a strategic climate change plan.

Here is the report:

Washington Post:

EBOCHA, Nigeria — Kingsley Okene is the chief here. But despite his authority, he says he has never managed to snuff the giant gas-fueled flames that have towered over his Niger Delta village for decades.Neither has the government of Nigeria, though it has often vowed to do so.

The flames spout day and night from tall smokestacks, fired by the gas that is a byproduct of oil pumped here by the Italian company Agip. As many as 100 flares burn at petroleum companies’ outposts across the oil-rich delta, belching harmful greenhouse gases and, human rights activists say, sickening residents.

GreenWire:

The Obama administration and the Illinois attorney general filed a lawsuit (pdf) today against a Midwestern energy company for alleged Clean Air Act violations at six coal-fired power plants, including five in the Chicago area.The 38-count complaint said Midwest Generation made major modifications at the facilities without also installing the proper pollution control equipment, efforts that have led to unsafe air quality in the region, including high levels of ground-level ozone and soot that are linked to asthma and other respiratory ailments.

document_gw_01 –

Abstract:

Background: The Love Canal was a rectangular 16-acre, 10-ft-deep chemical waste landfill situated in a residential neighborhood in Niagara Falls, New York. This seriously contaminated site came to public attention in 1978. Only one prior study examined cancer incidence in former residents of the Love Canal neighborhood (LC) .

Objective: In this study we aimed to describe cancer incidence in former LC residents from 1979 to 1996 and to investigate whether it differs from that of New York State (NYS) and Niagara County (NC) .

Methods: From 1978 to 1982, we interviewed 6,181 former residents, and 5,052 were eligible to be included in this study. In 1996, we identified 304 cancer diagnoses in this cohort using the NYS Cancer Registry. We compared LC cancer incidence with that of NYS and NC using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) , and we compared risks within the LC group by potential exposure to the landfill using survival analysis.

Results: SIRs were elevated for cancers of the bladder [SIRNYS = 1.44 ; 95% confidence interval (CI) , 0.91–2.16] and kidney (SIRNYS = 1.48 ; 95% CI, 0.76–2.58) . Although CIs included 1.00, other studies have linked these cancers to chemicals similar to those found at Love Canal. We also found higher rates of bladder cancer among residents exposed as children, based on two cases.

Conclusions: In explaining these excess risks, the role of exposure to the landfill is unclear given such limitations as a relatively small and incomplete study cohort, imprecise exposure measurements, and the exclusion of cancers diagnosed before 1979. Given the relatively young age of the cohort, further surveillance is warranted.

0800153 –