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)
Friday, February 03, 2023
Democrats say Republicans - including George Santos - wearing assault weapon pins ‘isn’t the flex you think it is’
Eric Garcia Thu, 2 February 2023
House Democrats criticised freshman Republicans, including embattled Representative George Santos, for wearing assault rifle pins on Capitol Hill.
Democratic Representative Jimmy Gomez of California tweeted out photos of Representatives Anna Paulina Luna of Florida and Mr Santos of New York wearing lapel pins in the shape of an assault weapon.
“Where are these assault weapon pins coming from? Who is passing these out?” he tweeted.
Ms Luna wore one during a hearing for the House Oversight and Accountability Committee on Wednesday while the embattled Mr Santos wore one during a speech on the House floor.
“Anna Paulina Luna wore an assault weapon pin at today’s Oversight hearing — less than 48 hours after her state experienced a mass shooting,” Mr Gomez tweeted. “You can’t make this sh*t up. This isn’t the flex you think it is.”
In images shared by Los Angeles Times photojournalist Kent Nishimura, the pin can be seen clearly on Mr Santos.
This was not the only confrontation that Democrats and Republicans had about firearms on the Hill this week. On Wednesday, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman whether he thought it was acceptable for members to bring firearms to the committee.
“The chair believes that members of the Natural Resources Committee should follow the House rules and the guidance of Capitol police,” he said.
Ms Ocasio-Cortez responded by saying that members have different interpretations of the rules. The question came after the GOP struck down a rule that would prevent members from bringing a firearm into the committee.
“I need to know for a sense of my own personal safety what your interpretation of the House rules are as it pertains to this issue,” she said.
Mr Westerman said that she should take it up with the House Administration Committee.
“So, we are seeing that the chair, who is responsible for the enforcement of these rules, does have a specific interpretation of whether firearms should be or not be permitted,” Ms Ocasio-Cortez said, following up by asking if he had consulted with the Administration Committee.
Mr Westerman said “the committee has not been in consultation with the House Administration because it’s an amendment, that’s not necessary,” before noting it was the only committee that had an amendment about bringing in a firearm and that was put in when Democrats controlled the House.
“So just, in summary, the decision as to whether the chair believes that firearms should be permitted in this committee is determined by House admin, but the committee has not been in touch with House admin whether this should or should not be allowed,” she said. “And so therefore, we’re going to leave this ambiguous.”
In response, Mr Westerman said it is up to every member of the House to follow the House rule
Democrats Go Ballistic Over Assault Rifle Lapel Pins Worn By GOP Lawmakers
“Anyone can wear whatever they want, but you have to have some common decency," said a stunned Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.).
HUFFPOST Feb 3, 2023 Florida GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna sports an assault rifle lapel pin even though there were six mass shootings in her state in January. SCREEN SHOT/TWITTER/REP. JIMMY GOMEZ
At least three Republican lawmakers in the House have been sporting tiny assault rifle pins on their lapels amid an alarming series of mass shootings — and critics are exploding.
“To promote that on the floor of the House is despicable and an insult to all of the victims of assault weapons,” Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) told a Nexstar Media reporter.
Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) said that “anybody can wear whatever they want, but you have to have some common decency.”
Meanwhile, Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.), who has worn the lapel pin for years, said in a tweet that he distributed them to his colleagues to “remind people of the Second Amendment of the Constitution and how important it is in preserving our liberties.” He appeared proud that he was “triggering” Democrats.
Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and George Santos (R-N.Y.) have both been photographed wearing the pins. Luna did so on Monday less than 48 hours after a mass shooting in her state that injured 11 people, two of them critically. There were six mass shootings in Florida in January.
He also pointed out the utter heartlessness of wearing the pins during Gun Violence Survivors Week — and noted that Clyde is the owner of a major gun retailer in Georgia that profits from gun use.
In response to one of Gomez’s comments, Luna bizarrely tweeted a photo of a signed, handwritten note apparently taped to a House office door saying: “Jimmy, stop trying to date me!” — with the rifle pin attached.
As of early February, the Gun Violence Archive counted 54 mass shootings in the U.S. in 2023. Six of them involved four or more fatalities.
Though handguns are most often used in mass shootings, AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles or similar guns — just like the ones the lapel pins depict — are increasingly a mass shooter’s weapon of choice, USA Today reported.
EPA Acts to Keep ‘Inactive’ Forever Chemicals Off the Market
WASHINGTON, DC, February 3, 2023 (ENS) – They’re called “forever chemicals” for a reason – because they don’t break down in the environment over time. Toxic per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS, are the forever chemicals, and they’re not rare – more than 9,000 PFAS have been identified.
These chemicals, resistant to both water and grease, are used in products from nonstick cookware, waterproof clothing, take-out containers and food packaging, to firefighting foams, fire retardants and repellents. And these compounds now are found in drinking water systems across the United States.
Scientists from the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, David Andrews and his EWG colleague Olga Naidenko, estimated in 2021 that the tap water of more than 200 million people, a majority of Americans, is contaminated with a mixture of PFOA and PFOS at concentrations of one part per trillion (ppt) or higher.
Last October, another nonprofit, the Waterkeeper Alliance, released its analysis of American waterways. It, too, sounds a loud alarm. In a test of 114 waterways across the country, 83 percent were found to contain at least one type of PFAS.
San Diego Creek, Orange County, California in 2016. In 2022 it tested higher in PFAS than any waterway tested on the West Coast. (Photo by Sergei Gussev)
San Diego Creek in Orange County, California contained the highest levels of PFAS concentrations of all sample sites on the West Coast. In total, 15 different PFAS compounds were found in detectable quantities.
But exposure to these chemicals harms both the environment and health health. Human exposure to PFAS is linked to kidney and testicular cancer, impaired functioning of the liver, kidneys, and immune system, endocrine disruption, fertility problems, birth defects, and developmental damage to infants, according to the National Institutes of Health. The agency points to a long-term study showing a link between PFAS exposure and increased risk of Type 2 diabetes in women. Other studies indicate a decrease in vaccine effectiveness in children.
When he was campaigning for the 2020 election, now President Joe Biden issued an environmental justice plan that called out forever chemicals. The plan promised that if elected Biden would “tackle PFAS pollution by designating PFAS as a hazardous substance, setting enforceable limits for PFAS in the Safe Drinking Water Act, prioritizing substitutes through procurement, and accelerating toxicity studies and research on PFAS.”
In October 2021, the Biden Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, launched a new three-year PFAS Roadmap to guide the agency’s activities to research, restrict, and remediate harmful PFAS through 2024.
The PFAS Roadmap includes a new national testing strategy to accelerate research and regulatory development, a proposal to designate certain PFAS as hazardous substances under an existing law, and actions to broaden and accelerate the cleanup of PFAS as well as steps to, “hold polluters accountable [and] address the impacts on disadvantaged communities,” according to a White House fact sheet. The roadmap is the product of the EPA PFAS Council, which EPA Administrator Michael Regan established soon after he took office.
The alarm bells keep ringing. Last June, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, released updated health advisories warning that even tiny amounts of two types of the chemicals, PFOS and PFOA, are harmful to human health.
On the cleanup front, the Department of Defense is moving swiftly to address PFAS at military sites throughout the country, but it’s a big job and progress is slow. The department is currently conducting PFAS cleanup assessments at the nearly 700 DOD installations and National Guard locations where PFAS was used or may have been released, and expects to have completed all initial assessments by the end of 2023.
Last week, the EPA took another step to limit the amount of PFAS chemicals are released into the environment by seeking public comment on limiting “inactive” PFAS.
EPA Proposal Would Check Out “Inactive” PFAS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has just proposed for public comment a rule that would prevent companies from starting or resuming the manufacture, processing or use of an estimated 300 PFAS that have not been made or used for many years without a complete EPA review and risk determination.
In the past, these chemicals, known as “inactive PFAS,” may have been used as binding agents, surfactants, in the production of sealants and gaskets, and may have been released into the environment, the EPA says.
An “inactive” designation means that a chemical substance has not been manufactured (including imported) or processed in the United States since June 21, 2006. Without the proposed rule, companies could resume uses of these PFAS without notification to and review by EPA.
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Michal Freedhoff (Photo courtesy U.S. EPA)
“This proposal is part of EPA’s comprehensive strategy to stop PFAS from entering our air, land and water and harming our health and the planet,” said Assistant Administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Michal Freedhoff, who helped to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act in 2016.
“The rule would put needed protections in place where none currently exist to ensure that EPA can slam the door shut on all unsafe uses of these 300 PFAS,” she said.
When the Toxic Substances Control Act, TSCA, was first passed in 1976, thousands of chemicals were grandfathered in under the statute and allowed to remain in commerce without additional EPA review.
Before TSCA was amended in 2016, EPA completed formal reviews on only about 20 percent of new chemicals and had no authority to address new chemicals about which the agency lacked sufficient information. This is part of the reason why many chemicals, including PFAS, were allowed into commerce without a complete review, Freedhoff explained in a statement.
Under the newly proposed Significant New Use Rule, if the EPA adopts it after public comment, the agency must formally review the safety of all of new chemicals before they are allowed into commerce.
TSCA also requires EPA to compile, keep current and publish a list of each chemical that is manufactured, imported, or processed in the United States for uses under TSCA, known as the TSCA Inventory. TSCA also requires EPA to designate each chemical on the TSCA Inventory as either “active” or “inactive” in commerce.
The proposal would first require companies to notify EPA before they could use any of these 300 chemicals. The agency would then be required to conduct a robust review of health and safety information under the modernized 2016 law to determine if their use may present unreasonable risk to human health or the environment and put any necessary restrictions in place before the use could restart.
On January 5, the EPA offered something new for people concerned about PFAS and the harms they can cause.
EPA released a new interactive webpage, called the “PFAS Analytic Tools,” which provides comprehensive information about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances across the country.
Map of known sites contaminated with PFAS across the United States. (Map courtesy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
EPA’s PFAS Analytic Tools draws from multiple national databases and reports to consolidate information in one webpage.
The tools allow mapping, charting, and filtering functions, so the public can see where testing has been done and what level of PFAS detections were measured.
“EPA’s PFAS Analytic Tools webpage brings together for the first time data from multiple sources in an easy to use format,” said John Dombrowski, director of EPA’s Office of Compliance. “This webpage will help communities gain a better understanding of local PFAS sources.”
The PFAS Analytic Tools includes information on Clean Water Act PFAS discharges from permitted sources, reported spills containing PFAS constituents, facilities historically manufacturing or importing PFAS, federally owned locations where PFAS is being investigated, transfers of PFAS-containing waste, PFAS detection in natural resources such as fish or surface water, and drinking water testing results.
The tools cover a broad list of PFAS and represent EPA’s ongoing efforts to provide the public with access to the growing amount of testing information that is available.
Because the regulatory framework for PFAS chemicals is emerging, data users should pay close attention to the caveats found within the site, the EPA advises.
Rather than wait for complete national data to be available, EPA is publishing what is currently available while information continues to fill in. Because of the differences in testing and reporting across the country, EPA officials warn that the data “should not be used for comparisons across cities, counties, or states.”
To improve the availability of the data in the future, EPA has published its fifth Safe Drinking Water Act Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule to expand on the initial drinking water data reporting that was conducted in 2013-2016.
Beginning in 2023, this expansion will bring the number of drinking water PFAS samples collected by regulatory agencies into the millions, the agency says.
EPA also expanded the Toxics Release Inventory reporting requirements in recent years to include over 175 PFAS substances, and more information should be received in 2023.
EPA will continue working toward the expansion of data sets in the PFAS Analytic Tools to improve collective knowledge about PFAS occurrence in the environment.
See information about the new PFAS Analytic Tools here and open the tools here.
PFAS Fighters Make Progress on the Scientific Front
The National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Superfund Research Program funds the search for practical applications to protect the public from exposures to hazardous substances.
Examples include:
The Sources, Transport, Exposure, and Effects of PFASs (STEEP) project, at the University of Rhode Island, is identifying sources of PFAS contamination, assessing human health effects, and educating communities on ways to reduce exposure.11
The Michigan State Superfund Research Center is developing energy-efficient nanoreactors capable of breaking the carbon-fluorine bond that keeps PFAS from degrading.
Scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, are working on options to contain aqueous film-forming foams used for firefighting, a major source of PFAS contamination.
The Brown University Superfund Research Center has developed databases that exploit land use data to identify cities and towns at high risk for PFAS exposure.12
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grantee CycloPure, Inc., has developed a new way to remove hazardous PFAS from water. The water pitcher-based filters should be an affordable option for people concerned about PFAS exposure where they live or work.
A team at the North Carolina State University SRP Center is studying alligators living in PFAS-contaminated water to understand possible effects on the immune system. They also developed a new high-throughput tool to quickly characterize how PFAS may be transported within the body and potentially cause harm.
Another SBIR project by EnChem Engineering, Inc. is developing an innovative technology to speed up removal of PFAS at Superfund sites.
SRP-funded small business AxNano developed a portable tool that relies on nanoparticles to quickly detect PFAS in samples. Their method is more affordable and efficient than traditional mass spectrometry.
Featured image: Drillers with Plains Environmental Services, Inc. conduct hydraulic profiling and electrical conductivity testing using a Geoprobe mobile drilling rig during a remedial investigation into the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS, at Truax Field in Madison, Wisconsin, March 22, 2022. (Photo by Senior Master Sgt. Paul Gorman courtesy U.S. Air National Guard)
Environmental activists are bracing for one last push to try and cancel the Willow oil project in Alaska, which they have slammed as a “carbon bomb”.
The project, led by ConocoPhillips, was awarded to the company by the Trump Administration’s Bureau of Land Management in 2020. The project could deliver 160,000 bpd of crude, the BLM said at the time, with reserves estimated at between 400 and 750 million barrels. The lifetime of the project was estimated at up to 30 years in 2019.
Earlier this week, Bloomberg reported that President Biden could approve the $8-billion project with a reduced number of wells, which sparked concern among activists and they are now preparing for battle.
According to a new Bloomberg report, this time they are using a new tactic that involves a focus on efforts to push for approval for the project at a reduced scale that would render it uneconomical rather than trying to stop its approval altogether.
The latest official input from the federal government came this week in the form of a report published by the Bureau of Land Management, which features a suggestion that four drill sites would be better than five, and another one should be deferred pending additional environmental impact analysis.
According to the BLM, fewer drilling sites would reduce the risk for local ecosystems, reduce freshwater consumption by the project, and reduce the total length of pipelines related to the project.
The Willow project has been seen as a fine balancing act for the Biden administration as it seeks the middle ground between its emission reduction ambitions and the immediate need for hydrocarbons to secure the country's energy supply.
The final decision on Willow is scheduled to be made in a month and the BLM has indicated an approval is not certain at all.
By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com
Biden administration recommends major Alaska oil project
By BECKY BOHRER and MATTHEW DALY This 2019 aerial photo provided by ConocoPhillips shows an exploratory drilling camp at the proposed site of the Willow oil project on Alaska's North Slope. The Biden administration issued a long-awaited study on Wednesday, Feb. 1, 2023, that recommends allowing three oil drilling sites in the region of far northern Alaska. The move, while not final, has angered environmentalists who see it as a betrayal of President Joe Biden's pledges to reduce carbon emissions and promote green energy.
(ConocoPhillips via AP)
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — The Biden administration released a long-awaited study Wednesday that recommends allowing a major oil development on Alaska’s North Slope that supporters say could boost U.S. energy security but that climate activists decry as a “carbon bomb.” The move — while not final — drew immediate anger from environmentalists who saw it as a betrayal of the president’s pledges to reduce carbon emissions and promote clean energy sources.
ConocoPhillips Alaska had proposed five drilling sites as part of its Willow project, and the approach listed as the preferred alternative by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management in the report calls for up to three drill sites initially. Even as the land agency released its report, the U.S. Interior Department said in a separate statement that it has “substantial concerns” about the project and the report’s preferred alternative, “including direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and impacts to wildlife and Alaska Native subsistence.”
The Bureau of Land Management, which falls under the Interior Department, also said in the report that identifying a preferred alternative “does not constitute a commitment or decision” and notes it could select a different alternative in the final decision. Opponents have raised concerns about the impacts of oil development on wildlife, such as caribou, and efforts to address climate change.
The project is in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, a vast region roughly the size of Indiana on Alaska’s resource-rich North Slope. ConocoPhillips Alaska says the project, at its peak, could produce an estimated 180,000 barrels of oil a day.
The Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, an Alaska Native corporation, and the Iñupiat Community of the Arctic Slope joined the North Slope Borough in praising the proposed alternative and calling on the administration to move ahead on the project. In a joint statement, they said advancing the project “is critical for domestic energy independence, job security for Alaskans and the right of Alaska Natives to choose their own path.”
This Sunday, June 30, 2019, aerial photo released by Earthjustice shows the Alaska's North Slope in the Western Arctic on the edge of Teshekpuk Lake, Alaska.
(Kiliii Yuyan for Earthjustice via AP)
Other Alaska Native groups have expressed concerns.
Leaders of the Native Village of Nuiqsut and city of Nuiqsut in a recent letter said they do not feel like the Bureau of Land Management is listening. The community is about 36 miles (58 kilometers) from the Willow project, in a remote region of Alaska’s far north.
The Bureau of Land Management’s “engagement with us is consistently focused on how to allow projects to go forward; how to permit the continuous expansion and concentration of oil and gas activity on our traditional lands,” Native Village of Nuiqsut President Eunice Brower and City of Nuiqsut Mayor Rosemary Ahtuangaruak wrote in a letter dated last week.
ConocoPhillips has estimated the project would create as many as 2,000 jobs during construction and 300 permanent jobs and generate between $8 billion and $17 billion in federal, state and local revenue in an area more than 600 miles (965 kilometers) from Anchorage.
Erec Isaacson, the president of ConocoPhillips Alaska, said in a statement the company believes the project will “benefit local communities and enhance American energy security while producing oil in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.” He said the review process “should be concluded without delay.”
The members of Alaska’s congressional delegation — Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan and Rep. Mary Peltola, a Democrat — all said they welcomed Wednesday’s environmental review and urged the administration to allow the project to move forward.
The project would bring miles of roads and hundreds of miles of pipeline to the area, disrupt animal migration patterns and erode habitat if it goes forward, said Earthjustice, an environmental group.
Jeremy Lieb, an attorney with the group, said Willow is currently the largest proposed oil project in the U.S. He said it is “drastically out of step with the Biden administration’s goals to slash climate pollution and transition to clean energy.” President Joe Biden campaigned on pledges to end new drilling on public lands and has set an ambitious goal to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030.
Biden “will be remembered for what he did to tackle the climate crisis, and as things stand today, it’s not too late for him to step up and pull the plug on this carbon bomb,” Lieb said.
U.S. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who fought the Willow project as a member of Congress, has the final decision on whether to approve it, although top White House climate officials are likely to be involved. Haaland has multiple options, including outright approval or rejection or a middle ground that allows some drilling but blocks other development. A final decision is expected no sooner than early March.
Federal agencies have within the last week made two major decisions around resources in Alaska. Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said it was reinstating restrictions on road-building and logging on the country’s largest national forest in southeast Alaska, the Tongass National Forest.
And on Tuesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it was exercising its so-called veto authority under the federal Clean Water Act to block plans for a proposed copper and gold mine in a mineral-rich area of southwest Alaska because of concerns about its environmental impact on a rich Alaska aquatic ecosystem that supports the world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery.
___
Daly reported from Washington, D.C.
ConocoPhillips sees profits rise on higher commodity prices ConocoPhillips emphasized its natural gas and liquefied natural gas portfolio in its fourth quarter earnings report. Both are important for a European economy looking to rely less on Russian resources. Photo courtesy of ConocoPhillips.
Feb. 2 (UPI) -- U.S. major ConocoPhillips on Thursday reported fourth quarter profits that were nearly 25% higher than year-go levels, supported in large part by higher commodity prices.
Conoco reported fourth quarter earnings of $3.2 billion, compared with $2.6 billion during the three-month period ending in December 2021. The company attributed much of the earnings to higher volumes and better prices.
The realized price, the price at which Conoco sold its products, came in at $71.05 per barrel of oil equivalent, 8% higher than the same period last year. Full-year revenue of $18.7 billion was supported by a realized price of $79.82 per barrel of oil equivalent, 46% higher than the previous year.
Crude oil prices moved above $100 per barrel last year, supported by supply-side concerns that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Russia was a major crude oil and natural gas supplier before Western sanctions limited its output.
Similar to Shell, top brass at Conoco said much of the corporate focus last year was on natural gas and liquefied natural gas, which is replacing some of the market share that Russia has lost.
"Building on 60 years of global LNG expertise, we expanded our LNG business in Australia, Germany, Qatar and along the U.S. Gulf Coast," chairman and CEO Ryan Lance said.
Conoco has a deep LNG bench, but the Sabine Pass and Corpus Christi export terminals in the United States are among the largest in its portfolio. Of the 25 vessels loaded with LNG that left U.S. export terminals during the week ending Jan. 25, nine departed from the Sabine Pass terminal in Louisiana and five left from Corpus Christi.
All told, its production for the fourth quarter was only slightly above year-ago levels, with late-year storms impacting the company's operations in the Lower 48 U.S. states.
Further north, however, the company is among the few to set its sights on Alaska. Despite "substantial" environmental concerns, the government gave its tentative approval to the development of the Willow project, situated on land that Conoco has leased for decades.
The reserve could yield as much as 614 million barrels of oil over the next three decades.
Biden blocks Pebble copper-gold mine in Alaska
Bloomberg News | January 31, 2023 | The area where Pebble mine would be built, 320 km southwest of Anchorage, within the Bristol Bay watershed. Image courtesy of Northern Dynasty Minerals.
The Biden administration banned the dumping of mining waste near Bristol Bay, Alaska, issuing a decree that thwarts longstanding plans to extract gold, copper and molybdenum because of potential harm to the region’s thriving sockeye salmon industry.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s final determination, announced Tuesday, effectively blocks the mine planned by Pebble Limited Partnership as well as future mining of the same deposit in headwaters of Bristol Bay, home to the world’s largest sockeye harvest.
“The Bristol Bay watershed is a vital economic driver, providing jobs, sustenance, and significant ecological and cultural value to the region,” EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan said in an emailed release. “With this action, EPA is advancing its commitment to help protect this one-of-a-kind ecosystem, safeguard an essential Alaskan industry and preserve the way of life for more than two dozen Alaska Native villages.”
Pebble, a subsidiary of publicly traded Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd., has been seeking to mine in the area for roughly two decades and could challenge the decision in federal court. Chief Executive Officer John Shively said the “next step will likely be to take legal action to fight this injustice,” calling the EPA’s move an unprecedented preemptive veto of the project that “is not supported legally, technically or environmentally.”
Shares of Northern Dynasty Minerals fell in Toronto trading.
The ban dovetails with a pledge President Joe Biden made while campaigning for the White House, when he called Bristol Bay “no place for a mine.”
Bristol Bay supplies roughly half of the world’s wild sockeye salmon, generating an estimated $2.2 billion in economic activity each year. A record number of sockeye have returned to Bristol Bay to spawn in recent years, even as other salmon runs have declined.
Katherine Carscallen, director of Commercial Fishermen for Bristol Bay, called EPA’s final action “surreal,” because it “will finally put an end to the threat of Pebble.”
“Any mining of that site would do irreperable damage to the watershed,” Carscallen said. “This is not just about fighting this mine this year or the last 20 years but making sure we won’t be fighting another mine at that site in the future.”
The proposed Pebble Mine has been a source of contention for years. Under former President Barack Obama, the EPA recommended restrictions that would rule out the project. But the agency later withdrew the controls after a legal challenge. A federal judge last year sent the issue back to the EPA for reconsideration.
Critics said the decision conflicts with the Biden administration’s commitment to accelerating the deployment of renewable power and electric vehicles that rely on critical minerals.
These goals “cannot possibly be realized responsibly if US government authorities continue on this adversarial path with domestic mining projects,” the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “This end-run of the proper permitting process creates significant regulatory uncertainty for the mining industry during a crisis point for minerals demand.”
The ban, ordered under the Clean Water Act, represents a victory for conservationists and local residents who lobbied the EPA to definitively kill the mine by wielding broad authority under the statute to veto projects involving the discharge of dredged material. The Bristol Bay move marks only the third time in 30 years the EPA has used the authority.
Under the final determination, the EPA is prohibiting certain waters in the Bristol Bay region from being used as disposal sites for waste associated with Pebble Limited Partnership’s plan as well as any future proposals targeting the same deposit that would result in equivalent or greater loss or change to aquatic resources.
The EPA “truly listened to the original stewards and first peoples of this land,” said Alannah Hurley, executive director of the United Tribes of Bristol Bay. “These Clean Water Act protections provide certainty that Pebble cannot be built in Bristol Bay.”
(By Jennifer A. Dlouhy)
EPA’s move to block Pebble project in Alaska ‘unlawful’, says CEO
Reuters | January 31, 2023 Drilling at the Pebble project in Alaska. (Image courtesy of Northern Dynasty Minerals.)
The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to block the proposed Pebble copper and gold mining project near Alaska’s ecologically sensitive Bristol Bay watershed is “unlawful” and hurts the state, said the top boss of the mining project.
The EPA has moved to prevent the company from storing mine waste at the watershed, home to important salmon species, including the world’s largest sockeye salmon fisheries, which have supported critical wildlife and a multibillion-dollar industry.
“This preemptive action against Pebble is not supported legally, technically, or environmentally,” said John Shively, chief executive of Pebble LP, a unit of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
He also said US President Joe Biden’s strategy to secure minerals for green energy goals seems to be giving “passing support” to minerals such as lithium in the United States and seeking an “enormous supply of copper … from other nations”.
The project has been on a roller coaster for the past 15 years. Former US President Barack Obama opposed the project, and his successor Donald Trump ultimately also did after deciding it was too risky.
Earlier in December, the regional EPA head suggested that the agency veto the project, which has one of the world’s largest copper and gold deposits.
The EPA was not immediately available for comment.
(By Sourasis Bose; Editing by Anil D’Silva)
Immigration increase alone won't fix the labour market, experts say
Rosa Saba, The Canadian Press Feb 1, 2023
Experts say Canada’s plan to increase immigration may ease some pressures in the labour market, but bigger changes are needed to ensure new permanent residents are matched with the jobs that most need filling.
With the unemployment rate at historic lows, many companies are “starved” for workers, and new immigrants will help fill some of the need, said Ravi Jain, principal at Jain Immigration Law and co-founder of the Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association.
The federal government’s new immigration plan calls for the admission of 1.45 million more new permanent residents over the next three years, beginning with 465,000 in 2023 and reaching 500,000 in 2025. That's compared with 341,000 in 2019.
According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, the plan is intended to help attract labour in key sectors, including healthcare, skilled trades, manufacturing and technology.
“It’s clear that there are real gaps, real demands, and real needs,” said Naomi Alboim, a senior policy fellow at Toronto Metropolitan University and a former Ontario Deputy Minister of Immigration.
But upping immigration levels is just one way to begin addressing those needs, she said -- the government's plan should be part of a wider initiative to address temporary workers, international students and a larger range of jobs.
Change is needed to ensure new Canadians are well-matched to jobs that maximize their skills, qualifications and experience, said Alboim.
Recent immigrants are less likely to see their skills and education utilized than Canadian-born workers, Statistics Canada said, and new and recent immigrants are overrepresented in certain industries, including transportation and warehousing, and accommodation and food services.
Government policies have created a mismatch between the specific skills employers are looking for and the skills of immigrants being approved, Toronto immigration lawyer Sergio Karas said.
Some of this mismatch begins with international students, said Karas. Though many international students plan to become permanent residents after they graduate, many of them aren’t in programs for jobs that are in demand by immigration policies, like healthcare or trades, he said.
International students and temporary foreign workers (TFWs) have made up an increasingly large portion of Canada's economic immigrants, or those selected for their contribution to the economy, who made up more than half of recent immigrants in 2021, Statistics Canada said.
In 2020, 67 per cent of the country’s principal applicants in the economic class were previously temporary foreign workers or international students, the agency said.
But that 67 per cent is a relatively small portion of all the temporary workers and international students in Canada, said Alboim. Canada had 777,000 TFW work permit holders in 2021, and almost 622,000 international students that year, Statistics Canada said.
Canada’s dependence on temporary workers to fill long-term gaps is a huge problem, said Alboim. It creates little incentive to improve wages, conditions or supports for temporary workers, she said.
Federal immigration policy seems laser-focused on jobs requiring higher levels of training and education, said Alboim, a barrier to permanent residency for many TFWs and international students.
That's despite the fact that much of Canada’s labour shortage is in jobs that require lower levels of education or experience, jobs that many temporary workers and students take on, said Alboim.
The federal government should expand its scope to prioritize more of these kinds of jobs, she said.
“There are way, way, way more people here now with temporary status that will never be able to transition to permanent residency, assuming they want to, unless the rules for permanent residency are changed to recognize that we actually need them too,” she said.
However, not all the onus lies on the federal government, Jain said. One ongoing problem has been immigrants’ credentials not being recognized in Canada, and while there have been some recent changes aimed at improving that, more needs to be done, he said. These credentials are the jurisdiction of provinces and territories, not Ottawa.
Provincial and regional immigration programs often do a better job of bringing in workers who can meet a wide range of labour needs including in lower-skill jobs, Alboim said, noting those programs are set to increase under the federal government’s plan.
A legislative amendment recently gave the minister of immigration the power to select immigrants for Express Entry programs based on specific qualities like occupation, but currently Alboim anticipates that use of that power will be focused on higher-level jobs.
“(There are) real needs at the high end, which immigration should certainly be focused on, but not exclusively,” she said.
Jain agreed.
“My worry is that if the targeted draws get too heavy, like if it's weighted too much in terms of the proportion of people coming in, then I worry that some of these other folks will get marginalized,” he said.
“There needs to be some kind of a balance.”
— With files from Lee Berthiaume
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 19, 2023.
