It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Thursday, March 31, 2022
Shell reconsiders exploring Cambo oilfield
in the UK
With a surge in oil prices since Russia invaded Ukraine, Shell is said to still be invested in the controversial oilfield project.
Shell’s decision to pull out of the Cambo oilfield project in the UK last December is being reconsidered by the oil giant now that the “economic, political and regulatory environment” had changed. With a surge in oil prices since Russia invaded Ukraine, Shell is said to still be invested in the controversial oilfield project.
The Cambo oilfield, which is located to the west of Shetland, was first licensed for exploration in 2001 and is said to have the capacity to produce hundreds of millions of barrels of oil, according to EcoWatch. While the “UK government has been more willing to speed investment in domestic fossil-fuel production” as a way to reduce its dependence on foreign oil and gas, environmentalists warn that the development of Cambo would threaten the UK’s goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 and could threaten many ocean species.
“We know this is a response to the Ukraine war,” Mark van Baal, leader at Follow This, said. “The only good response to the Ukraine war is to replace Russian fossil fuels with renewables.”
Environmentalists believe that “developing Cambo would contradict the advice of the International Energy Agency, which said that no new fossil-fuel exploration could be allowed if the world is to meet the Paris agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels,” EcoWatch reported. All the while, Shell also promised to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
“Any new fields will be stranded if we are to meet the Paris climate targets,” van Baal said.
However, Shell continued to own an interest in Cambo, according to the BBC and The Guardian, as the company’s been reported to currently still have analysts assigned to the project. Therefore, climate activists’ said they will have to up their pressure on Shell once again.
“Cambo makes as little sense today as it did last year,” Tessa Khan, director at Uplift, said.
Short cons, long cons: crypto currencies, NFTs and making money off of the war in Ukraine
While it’s hard to fault the Ukrainian government for fundraising by whatever means necessary during a terrible time of crisis, the adoption of crypto for fundraising in this way is worrying.
When I first started to hear and read about Bitcoin and the blockchain technology that underpins it, the concept of a currency outside of the control of governments and limited in the amount that would be created to ensure its value would increase over time intrigued me. Soon after, reading about the enormous amounts of energy required to ‘mine’ a non-existent thing, much of it happening in poorer countries still reliant on the most polluting fuels to produce the necessary processing power used in the creation of it, I was horrified.
It became clear to me over time that the majority of those talking about cryprWeb3 is Going Just Greato-currency’s utopian potential were right leaning libertarians, most of them much younger than the ones obsessed with gold and silver as true measures of ‘value’ over ‘fiat’ currencies who came before them.
For many of those who bought in early enough, Bitcoin and some of its imitators have created great fortunes (some just as quickly lost due to volatility in an unregulated market), especially if they sold some or all of it at the right time.
Speaking of Bitcoin imitators, the most successful of these is the Ethereum platform and its currency, Ether. A recent profile of its founder, 28 year old Canadian Vitalik Buterin put the utopian vision of much of the crypto community front and center, with the author of the piece in Time magazine writing, “Buterin hopes Ethereum will become the launchpad for all sorts of sociopolitical experimentation: fairer voting systems, urban planning, universal basic income, public-works projects. Above all, he wants the platform to be a counterweight to authoritarian governments and to upend Silicon Valley’s stranglehold over our digital lives.” Somewhat ironically, many of those who hold and have increased the value of Ether are the same Silicon Valley types it was designed to get around. Over the last year or so it’s become more mainstream as it’s also the platform used to trade ‘non-fungible tokens’ or NFTs, arguably the biggest scam created in the crypto sphere yet.
In a nutshell, NFTs allow people to buy access to a gif, photo or work of art through a URL accessible to all on the internet, works that the buyer would have no real ownership of, the asset basically being a receipt for their purchase that they can theoretically sell.
The claim is made that NFTs will create wealth for starving artists, who are supposed to receive a piece of the action every time they’re sold. This may be enforceable for someone like ‘Obey’ creator Shpard Fairey but less so for those with less celebrity. The space is already rife with claims of outright theft of others’ work on the OpenSea platform where the majority of them are sold.
Celebrities like Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton have jumped on board the trend arguably inflating the value of works like the ‘Bored Ape Yacht Club’, repetitive images one of which has sold for $2.3 million.
Contrary to the purported hopes of Buterin and other crypto ‘visionaries’, alongside the introduction of NFTs, more and more coins have proliferated with little seeming motive beyond enriching their creators and promoters with hundreds of meme or ‘sh*t’ coins produced using yet more energy for tokens with dodgy prospects. Some with greater technical knowledge than this writer have also argued that most of these tokens are created by amateurs and aren’t as secure as Bitcoin or Ether.
Some of these ‘sh*t’ coins have been outright ‘pump and dump’ scams, with basically no protections provided for investors, even in comparison to the most speculative assets available in traditional markets like penny stocks. Others like EthereumMax, which has no connection to Ethereum itself, court fraud.
One recent example of the former shows how internet ‘influencers’ can leverWeb3 is Going Just Greatage their often very young fans to make large amounts of money for themselves while ‘pulling the rug out’ from those who believe in their schemes.
Paul Denino, who goes by the name Ice Poseidon and was one of the most popular streamers on Twitch before he was banned, continued his ‘IRL’ (in real life) streams on Youtube where he recently pushed his own CXcoin on his young followers, promising that he and they would all get rich together. Shortly after the coin’s launch, Denino removed $500,000 from CX, tanking its value and leaving investors holding the bag. He was said to have kept $300,000 for himself and paid the coin’s developers with the remainder.
Commenting on the rug pull while showing no regret, Deninotold streamer Coffeezilla, who is at the forefront investigating these influencer scams, “Part of the responsibility is on them [the fans] as well, for putting too much emotion into it.”
He went on to say after the streamer pressed him about his ability to return the money, “If you want the answer, yeah I could give the money back, it is within my power, but I am going to look out for myself and not do that.”
Ice Poseidon has faced no consequences thus far for this activity, although he hopefully lost some of his fan base for this unethical scheme.
While Denino’s actions and those of many others like him are terrible, including some in the Youtube collective called the “Faze Clan” who engaged in an even larger rug pull earlier using a token called “Save the Children” that did no such thing, the inroads that crypto has made into charitable and humanitarian giving are even more troubling, which brings us to their use in raising money for those suffering from the ongoing war in Ukraine.
Like almost every article not detailing a specific allegation of some kind of fraud or illegal activity that I found in researching this, most of the coverage of the use of crypto currencies in aid of besieged Ukrainians has been overly positive, ignoring any possible problems and putting a positive spin on them in ways that would do a public relations firm proud.
After about 3 weeks of violent conflict, Mykailo Federov, Ukraine’s Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation made an interesting announcement in terms of the country’s crypto fundraising, “With the beginning of the war, cryptocurrencies became a powerful tool for attracting additional funding to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine. In more than three weeks of war, the Crypto Fund of Ukraine has raised more than $54 million in cryptocurrencies.” https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/17/22982608/ukraine-crypotcurrency-sector-legalized-zelenskyy-signs-bill
Leaving aside how problematic fundraising for military purposes is on its face, a number of less well known coins quickly angled to have their tokens join Bitcoin, Ether, Solana and the original meme currency, Dogecoin, in being accepted as part of the country’s official fundraising effort through the web-site Aid for Ukraine
These crypto entrepreneurs made this happen by promising to donate large sums of their own tokens. Gavin Wood, founder of the currency Polkadot got the ball rolling with the promise of $5 million if Ukraine’s government adopted the currency, which they did soon after. Polkadot tokens have since gained 13% in value. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/03/01/ukraine-opens-polkadot-wallet-for-war-fundraising/
What Ukraine’s government had planned was a commemorative token with no value as a thankyou for those who donated money in the form of crypto to their fundraising efforts. Almost immediately after the announcement, donations flooded in and it was clear that some were looking at the airdrop as a speculative opportunity. Unfortunately for their plans, just before the airdrop was to take place, scammers were already circulating a fake token and making money off it from unsuspecting buyers. https://icobattle.com/airdrops/ukraine-cancells-crypto-airdrop-program-instead-embraces-nfts-plan/ Outrage followed by some donors who clearly had plans for whatever token came out of the cancelled airdrop.
To make up for the cancellation, Ukraine’s government has promised to create NFTs as a thank you for at least some donors.
While it’s hard to fault the Ukrainian government for fundraising by whatever means necessary during a terrible time of crisis, the adoption of crypto for fundraising in this way is worrying. Rather than the revolution promised as part of ‘Web 3.0’ that would come out of blockchain technology, not much more has been done beyond creating an anonymous digital ledger and empowering some of the worst cons so far this century.
*In researching this article I relied heavily on two other sources besides Coffeezilla, who is cited above. The Youtube show and podcast Scam Economy, which covered the use of crypto by Ukraine in a recent episode and the web-site Web3 is Going Just Great by Molly White which aggregates stories of the many scams coming from the crypto world on a daily basis.
Climate Groups Say Planetary Impacts of Crypto Mining Could Be Reduced by 99%
"No matter how you feel about bitcoin, pushing those with the power to ensure a code change will make our planet and communities safer from the destructive impacts of climate change." According to green groups, bitcoin mining uses as much annual electricity as entire nations including Sweden and the Netherlands. (Photo: QuoteInspector.com/Flickr/cc)
A simple switch in the way bitcoin is coded could reduce the power-hungry cryptocurrency's energy use by 99%, dramatically reducing its environmental impact.
"The 'currency of the future' is dragging us into the past when it comes to the urgent battle to save the climate."
That's according to a new campaign launched Tuesday by a coalition of billionaire-backed green groups aiming to "Change the Code, Not the Climate."
"The science is clear: To prevent runaway climate change, we need to start phasing out fossil fuels and investing in the clean energy economy," Greenpeace USA chief program officer Tefere Gebre said in a statement.
"No matter how you feel about bitcoin, pushing those with the power to ensure a code change will make our planet and communities safer from the destructive impacts of climate change," he added. "What we do have is a solution: Change the Code. Not the Climate."
The new effort is backed by Chris Larsen, the co-founder and executive chairman of ripple, a cryptocurrency and digital payment network for financial transactions. Larsen has contributed $5 million to fund the campaign's ads, which will appear on Facebook as well as in publications including MarketWatch, The New York Times, Politico, and The Wall Street Journal.
The campaign notes that bitcoin's software code—called "proof of work" (PoW)—requires massive computer arrays that use as much electricity annually as entire nations such as Sweden and the Netherlands. In order meet this ever-increasing demand for electricity, bitcoin miners are buying U.S. coal plants and striking deals with fossil fuel corporations to purchase flare gas, which is normally burned off, to power their operations.
The activists cite a 2018 study published in the journal Nature Climate Change that found continued wide adoption of bitcoin could alone produce enough carbon dioxide emissions to push planetary warming past 2°C within less than three decades. The landmark Paris climate agreement seeks to limit warming below 2°C and, ideally, no higher than 1.5°C.
Experts say that switching from PoW to "proof of stake" (PoS) or other more efficient means of validating cryptocurrency transactions would dramatically reduce energy consumption and greenhouse emissions. Bitcoin rival ethereum's blockchain network—where most non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are traded—is switching to proof of stake, a move expected to reduce energy use by 99%.
Larsen, whose ripple runs on neither PoW nor PoS, insists he is not targeting bitcoin, but noted in an interview with Bloomberg that "now with Ethereum changing, bitcoin really is the outlier."
Michael Brune, campaign adviser and former executive director of the Sierra Club, said in a statement that "we are calling on the bitcoin community to change to a low-energy code. This could mean switching to proof of stake, federated consensus, or even changing proof of work to use far less energy. We won't prescribe the exact solution, but we demand urgent action to save our climate and future." Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, said that "the 'currency of the future' is dragging us into the past when it comes to the urgent battle to save the climate. Our planet can't afford bitcoin's excessive and unnecessary energy use and associated pollution."
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
FUTURE WAR WILL BE IN THE ARCTIC
Media repeats Kremlin anti-fracking claims—while ignoring Russia’s promotion of climate denial
Climate skeptics have revived an old claim that anti-fracking campaigns around the world have been bankrolled by the Kremlin.
In their latest attempt to use the Russian invasion of Ukraine to argue for more fossil fuel extraction, climate sceptics have revived an old claim that anti-fracking campaigns around the world have been bankrolled by the Kremlin.
This claim is being amplified by mainstream conservative newspapers. “Did Putin plot with eco-warriors to halt Britain’s fracking and keep us all hooked on his gas?” asked Guy Walters in the Daily Mail. Days later, coal baron and climate sceptic Matt Ridley wrote in The Sun: “FRACK NEWS: How lying Putin spent millions spreading fake news about fracking.” Similar allegations have appeared in both The Telegraph and the Daily Express.
None of these articles provide evidence for the claims, which rely on an unsubstantiated remark from 2014 by the then NATO secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, that Russia had “actively engaged” with environmental groups opposing shale gas “to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas”. Rasmussen, a supporter of fracking, declined to give evidence at the time, saying: “That is my interpretation.”
Russia may have expressed opposition to fracking and covered protests against shale gas extraction on its state-run outlets, but it’s never been proven that the Kremlin has any ties, financial or otherwise, to the groups. Grassroots protests influenced the UK’s decision to impose a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing—fracking—for shale gas in 2019, an effective ban climate skeptics are now calling to be overturned.
But while conservative media is repeating old and dubious claims about Russia funding anti-fracking groups, it ignores the mountain of evidence that the Kremlin has promoted climate science deniers and opponents of climate action—including some paid by fossil fuel interests—through its western-facing propaganda outlet RT.
RT and climate denial
The channel RT, formerly Russia Today, had its license revoked by Ofcom this month over its biased coverage of the war in Ukraine, and Google has blocked its videos from appearing on YouTube. But there are numerous examples still available online of the outlet promoting climate science denial.
According to research by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) released in November, the RT website —along with fellow Russian outlet Sputnik News—was one of ten online sources responsible for 69 percent of climate change denial content on Facebook over the previous year.
Notably, RT’s response to the finding neither rejected the charge of climate denial nor said it accepted climate science, but instead attacked CCDH’s methodology. RT deputy editor in chief Anna Belkina told the Washington Post that RT does not “shy away from tackling the global concern of climate change”, before adding, tellingly, “nor would we disregard the variety of views essential to a healthy public discourse on its effects”.
Deniers promoted
In January, just weeks before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, RT published an article by Rob Lyons, a columnist for libertarian website Spiked, headlined: “How climate change alarmism has turned into pure fantasy.”
Spiked regularly platforms writers opposed to action on climate change, and has received at least £227,500 ($300,000) from the US oil billionaire Koch family.
In February, Lyons published a further piece on RT, titled “The relentless pursuit of ‘net zero’ is what is causing the energy crisis”.
In October, RT ran an interview with long-standing climate science denier Christopher Monckton, in which he said “there has been no global warming for seven and a half years”, and “the imagined disasters from warmer worldwide weather are imaginary”.
He used the interview to promote a GWPF climate denial event at last year’s COP26 UN climate summit in Glasgow. This was conducted by former UKIP leader Paul Nuttall, who concluded by defending Monckton as an “important voice” in the climate “debate”.
Polar bears and ‘thought police’
RT has also platformed the most outlandish climate denial propaganda. In March 2021, RT promoted the conspiracy theory that governments are planning to use the climate crisis to impose a “climate lockdown”—a claim spread by climate deniers during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to the Institute for Strategic Dialogue think tank.
In November 2019, RT published a piece titled “The REAL inconvenient truth: Polar bears thriving in spite of climate change, but saying this gets scientists fired”.
The piece was written by Susan Crockford, a self-styled polar bear expert who has produced research for the GWPF. Crockford has repeatedly claimed the scientific consensus that fossil fuel emissions are the dominant cause of climate change is based on “failed science”.
In 2012 it was revealed that Crockford had received around £570 ($750) a month from the Heartland Institute, a right-wing US think tank and major funder of climate denial.
In October 2017, RT gave favourable coverage to remarks by former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott at a GWPF conference, in a piece headlined: “‘Thought-police scientists shutting down factual climate change debate’—Ex-Aussie PM.”
The piece explains that the term “thought police” is a reference to George Orwell’s novel Nineteen-Eighty Four, an ironic observation to appear in a Russian propaganda outlet.
‘Climategate’ coverage
RT has also seized on high-profile attempts to discredit climate science, including the so-called “Climategate” scandal in 2009, in which emails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia were stolen and selectively leaked ahead of the UN COP15 climate conference in Copenhagen.
A November 2009 piece on RT titled “Global Tricks: Climate change we can’t believe in?” claims that, while experts and world leaders gather at the conference, “the scientific community is split over global warming”. It concludes that “the theory supporting global warming has taken a significant blow”.
The piece links to an article in the English edition of Pravda, the Russian state-owned newspaper famous for its propaganda during the Soviet period, headlined: “‘Climategate’ Exposes the Global Warming Hoax”.
Another RT piece on the same subject from November 2009, titled “Global Warning: [sic] Leaked ‘Climate Fraud’ emails under probe”, ends with a quote from Benny Peiser, director of the GWPF.
Peiser has been at the forefront of efforts to use Russia’s attack on Ukraine to demand more fossil fuel extraction. Before the invasion even began, he urged Prime Minister Boris Johnson to expand North Sea production, calling opponents of drilling “Putin’s useful green idiots”.
END ECOCIDE
Youth strikes worldwide demand climate action that centers ‘people not profit’
"The current system is widening the inequality gap—it has no place in our society."
From Dhaka, Bangladesh to Turin, Italy and beyond, youth climate strikers took to the streets across the globe Friday to demand that political leaders stop ignoring the scientific community’s deafening alarm bells and take action to slash carbon emissions before it’s too late.
“The current system is widening the inequality gap—it has no place in our society.”
Organized by the international Fridays For Future movement, the latest mass demonstrations stressed that worsening global class inequities and the climate emergency are deeply intertwined and must be tackled together—a message encapsulated in strikers’ rallying cry of “People Not Profit.”
“We live in a broken system, one where the richest 1% of the world population are responsible for more than twice the pollution as the poorest 50%,” Iris Zhan, campaign coordinator for Fridays For Future Digital, said in a statement. “That’s why we strike today to demand climate reparations to kickstart a transformative justice process in which political power returns to the people.”
As Fridays For Future organizers put it in their preview of the new global strikes, “Climate struggle is class struggle.”
On top of the in-person demonstrations worldwide, youth climate leaders on Friday also launched online campaigns urging ordinary people and political leaders to take three actions:
Demand #PeopleNotProfit locally: Colonizers and capitalists are at the core of every system of oppression that has caused the climate crisis. We need people in every corner of the world to stand with local fights to stop new fossil fuel infrastructure and financing.
Support climate disaster relief: The most vulnerable bear the cost of the damages to homes and communities, as well as the incalculable tool on life, culture, and connection to land.
“The wealthier countries that have had the greatest impact on climate change need to provide the necessary funding and aid,” Chukwama Paul, communications lead for the Loss and Damage Youth Coalition, said Friday. “The estimated cost of loss and damage in developing countries will be 290 USD and 580 USD billion per year by 2030 and the current financial commitment to support developing countries is 100 billion USD annually.”
“We are amplifying the need for the redistribution of wealth to help victims of loss and damage,” said Paul.
The worldwide strikes come nearly a month after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its latest report warning that the continued burning of fossil fuels is driving a “dangerous and widespread disruption in nature,” doing “irreversible” damage to marine and coastal ecosystems, and threatening the prospect of a livable planet for future generations.
“The facts are undeniable. This abdication of leadership is criminal,” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in response to the report. “The world’s biggest polluters are guilty of arson of our only home.”
A separate analysis published earlier this week by the United Kingdom-based Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research estimated that rich countries must cut off their oil and gas production entirely by 2034 to give the world a 50% chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C by the end of the century.
The report emphasized that “an equitable transition will require wealthy high-emitting nations make substantial and ongoing financial transfers to poorer nations to facilitate their low-carbon development, against a backdrop of dangerous and increasing climate impacts.”
Farzana Faruk Jhumu, a climate activist with Fridays for Future in Bangladesh, wrote in an op-ed Friday that young people across the globe “are asking world leaders to put #PeopleNotProfit at the center of the planet’s future.”
“Bangladesh, where I am from, contributes to only 0.21% of global carbon emissions, but we are facing cyclones, floods, and droughts every year caused by global warming,” Jhumu continued. “To ensure justice for the Global South, world leaders must understand their responsibility. The current system is widening the inequality gap—it has no place in our society.”
#WATERISLIFE
50% of US lakes and rivers are too polluted for swimming, fishing, drinking
A new report from the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) finds the country has fallen far short of the Clean Water Act's goal.
Fifty years ago, the U.S. passed the Clean Water Act with the goal of ensuring “fishable, swimmable” water across the U.S. by 1983.
Now, a new report from the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) finds the country has fallen far short of that goal. In fact, about half of the nation’s lakes and rivers are too polluted for swimming, fishing or drinking.
“The Clean Water Act should be celebrated on its 50th birthday for making America’s waterways significantly cleaner,” EIP Executive Director Eric Schaeffer said in a press release announcing the report. “However, we need more funding, stronger enforcement, and better control of farm runoff to clean up waters that are still polluted after half a century. Let’s give EPA and states the tools they need to finish the job – we owe that much to our children and to future generations.”
The report was based on reports that states are required to submit under the Clean Water Act on the pollution levels of their rivers, streams, lakes and estuaries. According to the most recent reports, more than half of the lakes and rivers are considered “impaired,” meaning that they fall short of standards for fishing, swimming, aquatic life and drinking.
Specifically, around 51 percent of rivers and streams and 55 percent of lake acres are considered impaired, The Hill reported. Further, 26 percent of estuary miles are also impaired.
The Clean Water Act was a landmark legislative achievement when it was passed in 1972. It promised to end the discharge of all pollutants into navigable waters by 1985, according to the press release. However, it has fallen short of that goal for several reasons, according to the report.
The act has strong controls for pollution pumped directly into waterways from factories or sewage plants but not for indirect pollution such as agricultural runoff from factory farms.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has dragged its feet in updating industry-specific technology-based limits for water pollution control systems. By 2022, two-thirds of these industry-specific limits had not been updated in more than 30 years.
Budget cuts have hampered the ability of the EPA and state agencies to enforce the law.
Permit requirements are poorly enforced.
Total Maximum Daily Loads, a kind of pollution control plan, are insufficient.
There are problems effectively managing watersheds that cover two or more states.
The report also broke down pollution by state. Indiana has the most miles of rivers and streams too impaired for swimming and recreation.
“Indiana’s waters have benefited from the Clean Water Act, but unfortunately, they also illustrate some of the gaps in the law,” Dr. Indra Frank, Environmental Health & Water Policy Director for the Hoosier Environmental Council, said in the press release. “We have seen persistent, unresolved impairments, especially for E coli bacteria in our rivers and streams, in part from industrial agricultural runoff. And we have also seen examples of Clean Water Act permits used to send water contaminated with coal-ash into our rivers. We need to halt pollution like this.”
Florida, meanwhile, had the most lake acres impaired for swimming and aquatic life.
“Florida’s toxic-algae crisis is the direct result of lax enforcement of phosphorus and nitrogen pollution limits in cleanup plans required by the Clean Water Act,” Friends of the Everglades Executive Director Eve Samples said in the press release. “Because these limits rely on voluntary ‘best management practices’ and a presumption of compliance, agricultural polluters regularly exceed phosphorus runoff limits while dodging responsibility — leading to harmful algal blooms in Florida’s lakes, rivers, estuaries, and even on saltwater beaches.”
The report did propose several solutions that range from making sure that the EPA and other agencies carry out their duties under the existing law to strengthening the act with new legislation to control runoff pollution.
This last is particularly important because agricultural runoff and other indirect pollution sources are the leading causes of waterway pollution.
“Factory-style animal production has become an industry with a massive waste disposal problem and should be regulated like other large industries,” the study authors wrote.
