Thich Nhat Hanh

Over Optimistic

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2010/06/15/chevron-deepwater-oil-drill-615.html#socialcomments

Chevron Canada executives defended Monday their decision to pursue an unprecedented exploratory well off Newfoundland, so soon in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster.

The project has attracted increasing international attention — and scrutiny — because Chevron is drilling a well in more than 2,600 metres of water, significantly deeper than the Deepwater Horizon project in the Gulf of Mexico, where a blowout in April continues to have a devastating environmental impact.

But vice-president Mark MacLeod said Chevron has an industry-leading safety record.

"Chevron has drilled over 300 deepwater wells. We've never had a blowout in deep water," MacLeod told reporters during a conference call.

Hmmmnnn -couldn't BP have said the they had never had a blowout  before April?  Moreover, perhaps Chevron should share their plans for shutting off the Gulf of Mexico gusher.  If that (hypothetical) plan works expeditiously,  perhaps we could belive that they had the ability to shut off a blowout off Newfoundland.

Positives from an Oil Spill

The extraction of oil pollutes and destroys livelihoods, lives, and ecosystems. Not much room for argument there: look at the results of BP’s gusher in the Gulf of Mexico, Royal Dutch Shell’s presence in Nigeria, and Chevron’s inherited mess in Ecuador. Then, once the oil is out of the ground our use of it pollutes even more. Burning fossil fuels increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere - warming the planet. W also create deadly smog in our urban areas by zipping around in our cars instead of taking public transit. Moreover, we destroy vast areas of pristine boreal forest by mining tar sands. (“Reclaimed” land is never as biologically diverse as untouched land.) Moreover, those toxic tailings ponds produced by tar sands mining are really nasty - and 7 out of 9 tar sands extractors do not plan to comply with Regulation 074 on capturing and reducing toxic tailings between 2011 and 2013. The decision is in: our use of oil is disastrous.

But, in a bizarre way, BP’s gusher may turn out to be a positive.

Have I gone mad? No – not exactly – I just spotted a glimmer of hope. The Friday, June 11, 2010 Report on Business section of the Globe and Mail contained several promising items. The lead headline reads “Spill Puts New Oil Frontiers at Risk.” (page B1 ) In other words, politicians and regulators and the public are now aware that another spill is inevitable if we continue drilling as we have. A smaller headline reads “Cheap, abundant, politically secure oil in no longer available.” That article continues on page B5. “According to a new Deutsche Bank report, this is the end of the oil age as we knew it….and our behaviour must change to recognize that. “ So this spill, horrible an environmental disaster that it is, is also an opportunity for environmental activists.

We should use increased awareness on the part of the public and politicians to prevent the lifting of the moratorium on drilling for oil off the coast of British Columbia. Write Mr. Campbell and tell him offshore drilling is too risky. We should also work to shutdown the Enbridge Gateway North Pipeline to coastal BC as, once it is in place, oil tankers will sail BC’s pristine coast – and eventually spill oil. (The Dogwood Initiative Project is already fighting this – check out their website at http://dogwoodinitiative.org/ if you want to work on this project.) Thirdly, we should push both provincial and federal governments to invest in light rapid transit and clean energy.  Encourage everyone you know to write to the Right Honorable Stephen Harper, to their federal MP, and to the provincial representatives.

Nasty Conclusions

I'm drawing nasty conclusions from the news reports on BP's environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100609/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_sketchy_plans

BP PLC's 582-page regional spill plan for the Gulf, and its 52-page, site-specific plan for the Deepwater Horizon rig vastly understate the dangers posed by an uncontrolled leak and vastly overstate the company's preparedness to deal with one, according to an Associated Press analysis. The lengthy plans were approved by the federal government last year before BP drilled its ill-fated well. ... Among the glaring errors in the report: A professor is listed in BP's 2009 response plan for a Gulf of Mexico oil spill as a national wildlife expert. He died in 2005.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/06/bp-campaign-donations-obama

Who's BP's favorite politician ever? If you're just going by the numbers, it's none other than President Barack Obama, who leads BP's lifetime campaign donation list with $77,051. That puts him just ahead of reliable oilmen such as Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young, his retired colleague Sen. Ted Stevens, and George W. Bush. According to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics, BP and its employees have given more than $3.4 million to federal candidates since 1990.

Is it cynical to make a connection between money spent on politicans and favourable regulatory regimes? However cynical, it doesn't happen  in Canada, right?  We don't allow the public interest to be subverted by political connections, do we?   Maybe.  "Oil" sands mining flourishes in Canada - even if it is much less than green.  Jeff Rubin, an economist, notes that:

There’s nothing clean about the production of synthetic oil from tar sands. The production of a single barrel of synthetic oil pollutes some 125 gallons of fresh water and emits over 200 pounds of carbon dioxide, principally as a result of the combustion of the natural gas, over 1,000 cubic feet of it, needed to generate the heat to separate the oil from the sand and then process it.  Currently, Canadian tar sands produce roughly one and a quarter million barrels per day, but the International Energy Agency (IEA) is projecting ultimate production at around 4 million barrels per day. Do the math on carbon emissions and water pollution, and you begin to get a sense of what has made the tar sands the most recent bête noire of the world environmental movement. ...The tar sands aren’t a greener alternative to deep-water oil. They’re just a more expensive alternative. And the more that synthetic oil from tar sands replaces deep-water production, the more you’ll pay to burn it.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/gulf-oil-disaster-doesnt-make-the-tar-sands-green/article1596265/

The government of Canada has subsidized development of the  tar sands in the past and continues to do so to the tune of $ 1 billion per year according to Kairos' report Pumped Up.   Moreover , the party currently in power has ties to the energy sector.  For example, Clarke Cross is a hired lobbyist for Enbridge who formerly worked for Canadian Alliance Party MPs. Yaroslav Baran lobbied the federal government on behalf of Enbridge throughout 2006 and is also a long time Conservative Party staffer (Out on the Tar Sands Mainline , Polaris Institute.)   This cozy relationship between oil and gas corporations and federal politicians has culminated in the  Conservatives tabling an omnibus bill that "is trying to rollback key environmental assessment rules through an omnibus bill currently under review by a House of Commons Committee. " http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2010/05/04/rollbacks-to-canadian-environmental-legislation-come-on-the-heels-of-the-gulf-oil-disaster/  

This cozy intimacy will lead to more environmental destruction in Canada unless the Senate breaks up the bill .  A nasty conclusion indeed .

Why Are We Doing This?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/gulf-oil-spill-runs-a-pipeline-to-our-collective-unconscious/article1584868/

"This is what I don't understand,” she admitted. “If BP doesn't know how to cut off the well, why are they drilling on the bottom of the ocean in the first place?”
“Don't be ridiculous,” another man at the table replied. “It's a mile deep. It's not just a question of shutting off a tap.”

Why are we drilling a mile deep if we have no idea how we are going to plug leaks or clean up spills?  Risky behaviour and no idea of consequences will be coped with is symtomatic of  addictions.  Have a look at the article diagram for a visual depiction of the size of the oil spill - it is gigantic.   And, read right to the end. There,  Ian Brown states "The temptation is to pass it all off as American. We ought to remember the oil sands in our own backyard. Their toxic tailing ponds already cover more than 50 square kilometres. They're a stone's throw from the Athabasca River, one of the continent's most delicate watersheds. Let's hope they don't spring a leak. "

Richard Heinberg on Peak Oil

The End of (Cheap ) Oil

The oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico demonstrates that we are:

a. addicted to oil, and
b. are willing to do anything to get it.

But the consequences are dire, as Richard Heinberg points out.

http://www.straight.com/article-325613/vancouver/richard-heinberg-what-end-oil-age-looks

This is what the end of the oil age looks like. The cheap, easy petroleum is gone; from now on, we will pay steadily more and more for what we put in our gas tanks—more not just in dollars, but in lives and health, in a failed foreign policy that spawns foreign wars and military occupations, and in the lost integrity of the biological systems that sustain life on this planet.The only solution is to do proactively, and sooner, what we will end up doing anyway as a result of resource depletion and economic, environmental, and military ruin: end our dependence on the stuff. Everybody knows we must do this. Even a recent American president (an oil man, it should be noted) admitted that “America is addicted to oil.” Will we let this addiction destroy us, or will we overcome it?

So why don't our governments invest in alternatives to oil? 

Oil Spills

http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/14027-1

As the costs of Gulf Coast cleanup efforts from the BP oil spill continue to rise, a new report examines the industry as a whole, in terms of safety and accident records. The international environmental education and resource group Global Exchange has found that operating errors and incidents around the globe are more common than the public likely realizes because most events don't make the news.

http://truecostofchevron.com/report.html

In 2009 Chevron spent more money lobbying thge federal government than at any time in its history, more than 60 % over 2008 - Chevron's previous record breaking year. With more than $ 21 million spent, Chevron earned a spot on the top ten list of highest spenders on all  2009 federal lobbying. ...while campaign giving became more partisan.....Chevron has led lobbying efforts for decades to get the U.S. moratorium on offshore drilling lifted.

I wonder who is lobbying the BC government in an efffort to permit offshore drilling on the  coast of BC?  Who in their right mind thinks that would be a good thing?   Oil company executives and shareholders, perhaps?   Please ensure that your RRSP doesn't hold any oil related mutual funds or shares.  And please write letters to the provincial and federal governemtns expressing your disapproval of osshore drilling.

Drill, Baby, Drill

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/16/gulf-oil-spill-bp

Ocean scientists in the Gulf of Mexico have found giant plumes of oil coagulating at up to 1,300 metres below the surface, raising fears that the BP oil spill may be larger than thought – and that it might create huge "dead zones"....The presence of huge strings of oil deep underwater has puzzled scientists on board the research vessel Pelican, back in dock after almost two weeks at sea. The assumption had been that the oil would rise to the surface, but instead it has formed into multiple layers suspended in varying thicknesses deep in the water.

Does anyone still think that drilling for oil offshore in the Arctic is a good idea?  Does anyone still think that we shouldn't deal with our addiction to fossil fuels?

We Are Insane

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/drilling-clash-puts-arctic-oil-at-risk/article1567542/

Canadian oil companies say they will not be able to drill in Arctic deep waters unless the National Energy Board drops a provision that requires them to be able to quickly complete a relief well in the event of a blowout.

The board had agreed to review its rule for requiring companies to be able to deal with a blowout by drilling a relief well in the same season. After BP's Gulf of Mexico blowout, the regulator suspended planned hearings on the issue, and said this week that it will examine its entire regulatory approach, including the same-season relief well policy.

In its March submission, BP said the same-season relief well policy “ought to be rescinded, and replaced by a series of goal-oriented regulations” that would include preventive measures and mitigation efforts that would include longer schedule for drilling a relief well.

In fact, Imperial Oil Ltd. had asked the NEB for an exemption from that relief-well regulation as it prepares for a drilling program in Ajurak property, which lies 120 kilometres off shore in 650 metres of water.

A strict application of the rule “would essentially preclude the drilling of deepwater wells, such as the Ajurak exploration well, which require multiseason operations,” Imperial said in a submission to the board earlier this year.”

Hmmm - the NEB is worried about the propect of oil belching into the Arctic ocean.  Frivolously and needlessly?  After all, it has been easy to stop the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico and to prevent damage to delicate ecoystems, there. Am I  right? 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-environment-gulf-oil-spill-cap-leak/

If efforts fail to cap the leaking Deepwater Horizon wellhead in the Gulf of Mexico, oil could gush for years—poisoning coastal habitats for decades, experts say. "We don't have any idea how to stop this," Simmons said of the Gulf leak. Some of the proposed strategies—such as temporarily plugging the leaking pipe with a jet of golf balls and other material—are a "joke," he added.

And the next hurricane season is about to begin.  http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATWOAT+shtml/302338.shtml

I have always assumed that oil company executives are doing the best that they can in the corporate environment  - that they do not really wish to despoil ecosystems or warm the entire earth.  After all, they are under enormous pressure to produce short term profits for their shareholders. Therefore, they cannot take measures to protect the environment if the compettition is not doing the same - which means no company will do so unless forced by regulations.

If we don't pressure our  governments to prevent such environmental disasters, we're collectively insane. 
Write the Prime Minister and ask him to have place a moratorium on deep water drilling in the Arctic.  Ask him to fund alternative energies in the same letter.  

Oil Spills and Environmental Damage

http://climateprogress.org/2010/05/02/20-year-veteran-of-coast-guard-with-a-spill-of-this-magnitude-and-complexity-there-is-no-such-thing-as-an-effective-response/

Oil spill responses have a very large component of symbolic reassurance to them.  For example, no doubt we will see oily ducks being washed in the coming days. However, the mortality rate of such ducks is extremely high. So while these salves may make us feel better, they do little to actually deal with the situation. ....there will be considerable ecological and economic damage, and there is basically nothing that can be done to effectively stop that from happening. ....prevention is the best policy. But that involves regulations to prevent corporations from taking calculated risks by shaving safety margins to decrease production costs.... We need to get over our technological hubris and stop taking risks with our global ecoystems.

Amen.

Peak Oil

http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/2010/05/drilling-oil-cost-needing-our-fix

When the Gulf of Mexico oil rig blew, there was probably not a fisherman or fish plant operator in western Nova Scotia, where I live, who didn't have the same cold flash: an oil rig blows on Georges Bank; the enormous tides of the Bay of Fundy suck half the oil up and down twice a day, polluting everything from Cape Cod to Lockeport and right up to Moncton; while the other half is locked in the "gyre" of currents that goes round and round over one of the world's best fishing grounds.   Nova Scotia Fisheries and Environment Minister Sterling Belliveau, picking up on several years of low-key oil company pressure on the issue, mused a couple of weeks ago about fish and oil being able to co-exist as the deadline to review the Georges Bank moratorium on drilling loomed. That went around the coast here like political oil slick. Belliveau, MLA for Shelburne, had championed the no-drilling-on-Georges campaign. Now, he had "become a politician," and broken his word....You might expect a disaster of this scale would get us thinking.

You might expect that  - if we weren't dealing with an addiction.  Wonder what the bottom looks like?

How Much Are Your Loved Ones Worth?

Dead, that is.  Would you trade three million dollars US for them?  Would your life be better?   Would you be happier with the money than with their presence at your dinner table?   Irritating as my family members can be, I wouldn't trade their lives for money.  (If you're reading this, I love you all very much  - OK?)

But that is what Massey Energy is offering the families of the miners killed underground at their mine.  They have 3 million bucks for each family of a miner killed underground.  Or in other words, they have plenty of money to settle lawsuits and none at all to ensure safety in their mines. Bastards .....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Energy

The explosion at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia is the worst mining disaster in 40 years with more loss of life than any mining accident since the 1970s. Mine safety investigators are still searching for an exact cause, though the methane explosion, largely preventable by proper ventilation, is being looked at closely. They're also reviewing the safety record at the Upper Big Branch mine, which amassed more than 1,100 violations in the past three years, many of them serious, 50 of them in March of 2010, including violations for improper ventilation of methane and poor escape routes[3]. Federal regulators had ordered parts of the mine closed 60 times over the past year. Questions about Massey Energy's mining safety practices, along with questions about CEO Don Blankenship's excessive spending on court appointment campaigns, are coming from the public, the Dept of Labor, and President Obama. An aggressive proponent of mountaintop removal mining (stripmining or surface mining), Massey Energy's record on safety and following environmental protocols were also called into question when in October of 2000 a containment area for the liquid by-product failed at a Massey impoundment in eastern Kentucky, releasing a 300-million gallon spill of toxic sludge, making the Martin County spill the the worst environmental disaster in the United States east of the Mississippi.

Burning the mining coal is a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions as well.  So, Massey Energy flouts safety regulations, creates environemental disasters, helps heat the planet, and  is careless with  its workers' lives. 

What will it take to get rid of the clout possessed by fossil fuel extractors?  How many oil spills and mining disasters do we have to see before we demand that governments make these industries pay for their "external costs?" How hot does the planet have to get?   Why aren't we, the general public, rioting in the streets?  Or at least working to pass laws against ecocide?

Peak Oil - Again

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/drilling-and-spilling-for-all-the-oil-thats-left/article1548522/

Most forms of unconventional oil and gas (including, by the way, shale gas) are invariably very hard on the environment. Although tar sands production draws most of the world’s criticism, we are quickly discovering that deep-water wells and the pressure surges they engender run the risk of wreaking even greater ecological and environmental devastation. ...Why is this so potentially devastating to America’s oil future? The Gulf of Mexico was the only area of the country where there was any reasonable hope of expanding domestic supply. Production in the lower 48 states peaked in the early 1970s....If you’re wondering why we’re risking catastrophic environmental consequences by drilling wells miles below the ocean floor, the answer is simple enough. It’s the same answer to the question of why we’re pouring billions of dollars into the tar sands.

It’s all that’s left.

Addicts usually deny they have a problem.  When an individual persists in use of alcohol or other drugs despite problems related to use of the substance, substance dependence may be diagnosed.  As a society, we're addicted to oil. We don't care that our use of fossil fuels destroys the environment - or the freedom of whole peoples.  (If you don't believe me, do some research on the Ogoni in Nigeria.  Or on Ken Saro Wiwa ring a bell.)   We don't care that we're running out - we don't wnat to plan an energy descent.   We just want to continue doing what we're doing......consequences be damned.

We're addicted to oil.

And You thought Albertans Hated the NEP

Wait until they hear about the following  idea.
http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/private-gain-or-public-interest

Canada’s oil and gas industry can and should be converted to a public-interest industry whose mandate would be to serve the broader public interest, not just the private interests of owners and shareholders....At present, the private corporations that dominate the oil and gas industry in Canada are inflicting serious environmental harm and causing major social and economic problems...The oil and gas corporations strenuously resist paying adequate royalties to the public owners of these resources, resulting in a loss of government revenue to support public services, infrastructure, and long-term savings.

The authors of this opinion piece suggest that "as with any corporate acquisition, the cost of buying out the industry would be paid for out of its future profits. In other words, the net cost to Canadian taxpayers would be zero, or close to it."  You have to admit, it is an interesting alternative to merely raising royalties and strengthening environmental regulations in the oil patch.  Perhaps "publicizing" the oil and gas industry would upset Albertans - but it would benefit Canadians and our democracy.

Preconceived Ideas Rap Us On Our Shins

I am reading two books at once:  1491 by Charles C Mann and Integral Ecology by Esbjorn  (the o should have an umlaut) and Zimmerman. Curioulsy, a commonality between the two books exists.  Both books/ authors refer to environmentalists who long for a supposed pristine past - one where humans were closer to nature -and then demolish that argument. 

Many deep ecologists are epistemological realists who condemn post modern environmentalists for speaking of nature as a social construct. In so doing, deep ecologists call upon the very same modern, scientific worldview that they otherwise blame for contributing to environmental destruction.  (Integral Ecology, page 146)

Indians worked on a very large scale, transforming huge swathes of landscape for their own ends.( 1491, p 279) Faced with an ecological probem, the Indians fixed it. Rather than adapt to Nature, they created it. They were in the midst of terraforming the Amazon when Columbus showed up. {(1491 page 349) Please see Mann's appendix for an explanation of his use of the word "Indian.}

So our - my -  preconceived notion that nature is pristine is supported neither by logic nor by the practices of the First Nations of North and South America.    Perhaps we should picture an ideal world and ecosystem and work to create it.    

Oil and Gas Site Contamination Risks

http://policymonitor.ca/energy/bc-oil-and-gas-commission-report/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PolicyMonitorCanada+(Policy+Monitor+Canada)

An audit of the BC Oil and Gas Commission has found that it must improve its oversight of oil and gas sites in order to adequately manage the risks of contamination, says Auditor General John Doyle in his latest report, released today.

Mr Doyle's report states that " An independent field review of sites that have received a Certificate of Restoration is not carried out to ensure that objective assessments are being made. The OGC relies mainly on desk reveiw of consultant restoration reports, submitted by operators, to provide oversight of the certificate process."  http://www.bcauditor.com/

 Can you imagine the Canada Revenue Agency relying on H & R Block to ensure that tax returns filed were correct?  Plenty of room exists for fudging in this system....

And worse - Mr Doyle's report states that " There are also a number of sites known as "legacy sites" that were certified as reclaimed to environemntal standards of the day before the OGC was established, and before modern standards existed."  The Oil and Gas Commission has not taken any steps to test these sites - so any contanimation that may exist is essentially ignored.  If we don't know about it, it doesn't exist, right? 

Haiti - the Tragedy before the Earthquake

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/01/12/haiti-earthquake.html

The largest earthquake ever recorded in the area rocked Haiti on Tuesday, collapsing a hospital where people screamed for help and damaging other buildings.

CBC Radio 1 news stated that Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.   The newscaster did not discuss the causes of Haiti's pverty: it is directly related to, and caused by, environmental degradation .  And environmental degradation is in turn caused by a desperate search for energy by the desperately poor population of Haiti.
http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/05/10/haitis-poverty-is-directly-linked-to-deforestation-and-habitat-loss/

 With an electricity sector that only covered 10% of Haiti’s population in 2006, chronic energy shortages have contributed to Haitian’s search for alternative sources of energy. Unfortunately for Haiti’s natural environment, wood became and continues to be the principal energy source in Haiti, accounting for 70 percent of energy consumption in 2006. This resulted in the steady deforestation of Haiti.

The environmental destruction in Haiti  led to a corresponding social destruction.  The fuel wood shortage is exploited by the already wealthy  to exract huge profits from most of the population .... Earthquake or no earthquake, Haiti will not be stable socially until its environment is healed.   Perhaps Haiti is a heartbreaking and frightening reminder of the fact that the economy is a subset of the environment  - and not the other way around.

We're Fucked

I am deeply and viciously depressed today so I am going to spread it around. 
Item  one: a headline from the New York Times on Nov. 15, 2009  “ Leaders Will Delay Agreement On Climate. ”  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/world/asia/15prexy.html

At a hastily arranged breakfast on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit meeting on Sunday morning, the leaders, including Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the prime minister of Denmark and the chairman of the climate conference, agreed that in order to salvage Copenhagen they would have to push a fully binding legal agreement down the road, possibly to a second summit meeting in Mexico City later on.

Item two: a post by George Monbiot at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/16/oil-running-out-madman-sandwich-board

As a report commissioned by the US Department of Energy shows, an emergency programme to replace current energy supplies or equipment to anticipate peak oil would need about 20 years to take effect. It seems unlikely that we have it. The world economy is probably knackered, whatever we might do now. But at least we could save farming. There are two possible options: either the mass replacement of farm machinery or the development of new farming systems that don't need much labour or energy.

There you  have it: The Easter Island Syndrome.  Humanity is delaying doing anything meaningful about climate change or peak oil  and all the while disaster grins ominously at us....

And don't bother complaining about my language - your children have much bigger things to worry about than swear words learned on a blog. 

Mining Pollution: Canada and the USA

A federal court recently ruled that Ottawa must (MUST!!!) dislcose the amount and kinds of pollution created by mining companies - including the corporations mining the tar sands of Alberta for oil. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2009/06/18/edmonton-oilsands-tailings.html Apparently, the data will be provided on line .... a boon to environmental activists! Now if that data includes CO2 emissons as well.... In contrast, the coal mining industry in the USA doesn't have to worry about the federal government disclosing the locations of coal ash dumps in America. The Obama administration is not releasing that information to the American population on the grounds of "national security." http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/18/coal-dump-location-obama-usa
And this decision is in spite of Obama promising less secrecy in government; a burst retaining dam on a coal ash dump in Tennessee; and the rift created between Obama and his environmental supoorters.