Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Groups Blast BP, Want More From Feds (Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, many more)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:01 PM
Original message
Groups Blast BP, Want More From Feds (Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, many more)
Edited on Wed May-19-10 01:02 PM by nashville_brook
http://energytopic.nationaljournal.com/2010/05/groups-blast-bp-want-more-from.php

http://www.nationaljournal.com/img/pdfs/100519_letter.pdf


Groups Blast BP, Want More From Feds



A coalition of environmental groups today criticized BP's efforts to clean up the gulf oil spill and is urging the government to take a bigger role in the process and to provide the public with more information.

"BP has hardly demonstrated its ability to act in the public interest," the groups, which include the Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club, wrote in a letter to President Obama dated today. "The federal government must ensure that the environmental and public safety response efforts are as effective as possible and that the public has the information it needs to evaluate and inform those efforts."

The groups want the government to make public more information related to worker safety, the size of the spill, the chemical dispersants that have been used, testing related to seafood contamination and how much damage the spill has caused to the natural resources in and surrounding the gulf.

The groups take particular issue with the risks chemical dispersants could pose in deep water. "The public has been kept largely in the dark about test results concerning the possible short and long term impacts of the oil, dispersed oil and chemical dispersants on people, wildlife and fisheries," the groups write. At congressional hearings Tuesday on the spill, several senators also voiced concern about the potential dangers of using the dispersants.

Other groups who signed onto the letter are the Audubon Society, Clean Water Action, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, Gulf Restoration Network, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Ocean Conservancy and Physicians for Social Responsibility.

(here's the letter in its entirety).
http://www.nationaljournal.com/img/pdfs/100519_letter.pdf


AUDUBON * CLEAN WATER ACTION * EARTHJUSTICE * ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND FRIENDS OF THE EARTH * GULF RESTORATION NETWORK * NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL * OCEAN CONSERVANCY PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY * SIERRA CLUB


May 19, 2010
Dear President Obama:


We are writing to urge the federal government to exercise more direct oversight of public safety protection, environmental monitoring, and environmental testing in response to the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
We thank you for the seriousness with which you and your Administration have taken the BP oil spill and the initial steps you have taken to mobilize the resources of the federal government to address and contain the spill and assist local communities. It is clear, however, that BP’s response in the areas of public safety and environmental protection have been grossly inadequate and it has repeatedly failed to provide the public with sufficient information to evaluate its activities.

To take one critical example, BP has failed to release information to support decisions that have been made regarding the selection and use of chemical dispersants. We cannot count on BP to protect the health and safety of people and the environment. While we agree that BP and other responsible parties are wholly financially responsible for the response and damages, the federal government must fulfill its responsibility to protect the environment and the public. The federal government must make public the results of all environmental monitoring and testing conducted to date and make future results available to the public as quickly as data are available. The public has been kept largely in the dark about test results concerning the possible short and long term impacts of the oil, dispersed oil and chemical dispersants on people, wildlife, and fisheries. Where BP equipment is needed for testing, that testing should be directly overseen by federal agencies.

In addition, the federal government must protect the affected communities, including the shrimpers and fishermen BP is hiring to respond. It appears that BP is not providing the needed training or safety gear for the responders and, as a result, may be placing them in harm’s way.


The federal government must make the following information public immediately:
1. Worker Safety. BP has hired local shrimpers, fisherman, and others to aid in response efforts. However, many of those involved in the response have reported that BP has failed to provide them with adequate safety equipment and training on how to avoid the health impacts from the oil and dispersants. This failure is placing the responders at risk for short- and long-term health consequences. The federal government must ensure that responders are properly equipped and protected.

2. Spill Size. The federal government has not updated its initial estimate of 5,000 barrels per day. However, several independent scientists from academia have provided quantifiable and credible estimates indicating an actual outflow that is as much as an order of magnitude higher. The federal government should undertake its own assessment of both the size of the spill and the lead rates associated with the accident and provide the underlying estimate method to the public. An accurate estimate is important for current response efforts, future regulations and emergency preparation, and for the federal government to fulfill its legal obligations related to liability.

3. Chemical Dispersant Monitoring and Impacts. The Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted BP approval to use chemical dispersants at the surface and subsurface level even though the impacts from subsurface use, which EPA calls “a novel approach,” are not known. The EPA’s directive puts BP in charge of monitoring, sampling, and testing. The federal government needs to ensure that unbiased information is provided to the public in real-time. Furthermore, the federal government should ensure that BP uses the most effective, least toxic dispersant.

4. Rapid-Response Contamination and Seafood Testing. We applaud the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for launching rapid response contamination testing efforts, but the findings and the results of other government testing of contaminant from oil and dispersants must be made available to the public.

5. Natural Resource Damage Assessment. NOAA is preparing the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) required under the Oil Pollution Act, in coordination with the states and BP. NOAA has provided very little information on its process or the information it has gathered to this point. In addition to conducting the NRDA in a transparent manner with public input, NOAA should be continuously updating the public as it gathers information on impacts.

BP has hardly demonstrated its ability to act in the public interest. The federal government must ensure that the environmental and public safety response efforts are as effective as possible and that the public has the information it needs to evaluate and inform those efforts. We look forward to working with the Administration on this important matter.

Sincerely,
Frank Gill Interim President Audubon
John DeCock President Clean Water Action
Trip Van Noppen President Earthjustice
Fred Krupp President Environmental Defense Fund
Erich Pica President Friends of the Earth
Cynthia Sarthou Executive Director Gulf Restoration Network
Larry Schweiger President & CEO National Wildlife Federation
Frances Beinecke President Natural Resources Defense Council
Vikki N. Spruill President & CEO Ocean Conservancy
Peter Wilk, MD Executive Director Physicians for Social Responsibility
Michael Brune Executive Director Sierra Club
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great!!! - k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. it seems to me, if you think there's walruses in the Gulf, you forfeit your Gulf-protecting duty...
you're out, done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. BRAVO!
These are the heavy hitters--they cannot be ignored! :party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Lets hope it does some good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. IT WILL.
Sierra? Audubon? National Wildlife? All the rest? Those are the best and the brightest--also the BIGGEST--environmental organizations in the U.S.! As I said, these are the heavy hitters. There's no way the government can ignore this. I'm so glad they banded together.

Thanks for posting! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devil_Fish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. I hope your right, but I don't think even they can make a diffrence to the corprate owned U.S. Gov.
There all ready shitting on CBS. You really think Tree Hugger corporations have a say in this?

I wish I didn't feel this way, and this isn't a personal attack, but I just don't think this will amount to a hill of beans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. What they said! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. kickeroo!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. ...and another...
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eyerish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. Glad to see this
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
11. President Obama, are you listening?
Please?

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. kick (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onestepforward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
13. K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
14. Why would they expect BP to act in the public interest?

BP is a capitalist entity, that ain't their charter.

If the environmental groups really want what they say they want they are going to have to realize that the worst enemy of Nature is Capitalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-19-10 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. This might be a legal term--
I would not be at all surprised.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. Good point. the government should have taken control from day one
and BP's only involvement should have been paying the bills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
17. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annm4peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
19. I sent the letter to my Senators and Congress members
and I told them they were failing the environment and the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC