California Marine Plastic Pollution Policy Tangled Up in Committee
By Leila Monroe
Last Friday, members of the California Assembly Appropriations Committee stopped Assembly Bill 521—a groundbreaking proposal to create a statewide marine plastic pollution producer responsibility program—from moving forward in the legislature. This is a missed opportunity to better protect our oceans, marine life, economy and communities from costly and harmful marine plastic pollution, but we are undeterred in our support for the solutions presented in this bill. We will continue to work to advance this program, and we are grateful for the strong leadership of authors Assembly Member Mark Stone (D-Monterey Bay) and Sen. Ben Hueso (D-San Diego).
According to an Associated Press story carried by the Washington Post and other outlets, Assembly Member Stone described the value of the marine plastic pollution producer responsibility program:
Cities and counties spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year cleaning up plastic trash that is on its way into the ocean. Isn’t an increased cost tied to making a new product that is causing a problem better than a taxpayer paying for it after it becomes a problem?
This program would have encouraged industry to reduce the amount of plastic it produces (especially single-use packaging) and share the costs of cleaning up what remains. By doing so, it would protect California’s ocean, beaches and communities from plastic pollution and reduce costly waste management, litter cleanup and recycling. In its 2008 report, CalRecycle estimated that Californians dump 3.8 million tons of plastic into state landfills every year—plastic that could be recycled or avoided all together.
California’s ocean and coastal tourism and leisure industries generated $92 million in GDP for the state in 2010 and supported 1.9 million jobs. By reducing plastic pollution, birds, turtles, whales and other sea creatures are also better protected from the waste that often kills or harms marine life when they swallow or become tangled in plastics found in our oceans that may kill them. This economic activity is dependent on a healthy and thriving ocean and marine life in order to succeed.
The Appropriations Committee is a fiscal committee with the responsibility of making choices that are beneficial to the health of our state’s economy. The economic value of the bill was clear: A.B. 521 presents the opportunity to save coastal communities from the $420 million spent annually to clean up plastic pollution from streets, parks, rivers and beaches, according to recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates. This savings doesn’t take into account additional value that will be generated by having producers of plastic products assist with improving and expanding recycling as well.
We are very sorry that the Appropriations Committee did not make the right choice for our oceans, our economy and our communities by moving the marine plastic pollution producer responsibility program forward this year.
But in the long run, the marine plastic pollution producer responsibility program is too important to fail. We’ll continue strengthening the program and build our coalition of supporters so we can move it forward in the legislature next year.
Visit EcoWatch’s WATER page for more related news on this topic.
SIGN THIS PETITION TODAY:
Eleven peaceful activists from the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise have taken to the water in inflatable boats with handheld banners to oppose the Statoil Songa Enabler oil rig, 275 km North off the Norwegian coast, in the Arctic Barents sea.
The banners say: "People Vs. Arctic Oil" and are directed at Statoil and the Norwegian government, which has opened a new, aggressive search for oil in the waters of the Barents Sea.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) paved the way Friday for the 600-mile, 42-inch fracked gas Atlantic Coast Pipeline to proceed when it issued the final environmental impact statement (FEIS). A joint project of utility giants Duke Energy and Dominion Energy, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would move fracked gas from West Virginia into Virginia and North Carolina.
In April, the Sierra Club submitted more than 500 pages of legal and technical comments on FERC's draft EIS, which were joined by more than 18,000 individual comments detailing opposition to the project. The pipeline has been met with widespread opposition, with more than 1,000 people participating in public hearings across the three affected states. The Sierra Club recently requested that FERC issue a new environmental review document analyzing information that came in after or late in, the public comment process.
By Jessica Corbett
"It's time Rex Tillerson step down or be removed," said Gigi Kellett of Corporate Accountability International, following an announcement on Thursday that ExxonMobil will pay $2 million for violating U.S. sanctions against Russian officials while the now-secretary of state was the company's CEO.
"ExxonMobil demonstrated reckless disregard for U.S. sanction requirements," according to enforcement filing released by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which issued the penalty. Though the fine is reportedly the maximum penalty allowed, it's pittance to one of the world's most profitable and powerful corporations, which last year reported a profit of $7.8 billion.
New analysis from Amory B. Lovins debunks the notion that highly unprofitable, economically distressed nuclear plants should be further subsidized to meet financial, security, reliability and climate goals. The analysis, which will appear shortly in The Electricity Journal, shows that closing costly-to-run nuclear plants and reinvesting their saved operating costs in energy efficiency provides cheaper electricity, increases grid reliability and security, reduces more carbon, and preserves (not distorts) market integrity—all without subsidies.
By Christian Detisch and Seth Gladstone
In the wake of Senate Republicans' ever-deepening debacle over their flailing attempts to strip health insurance from 22 million people, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is desperate to do something—anything—to show that he can get legislation passed. To this end, he's bypassing the standard committee review process to push a complex 850+ page energy bill straight to the full Senate floor. Perhaps not surprisingly, this legislation, the Energy and Natural Resources Act of 2017, would be a disaster for public health and our climate.
A new law passed this week in South Miami will require all new homes built in the city to install solar panels. The measure, which was inspired by a proposal from a teenage climate activist, will go into effect in September.
The text of the ordinance details the climate impacts facing South Miami.
By Ben Jervey
Just last week, we fact-checked and debunked every line of The Dirty Secrets of Electric Cars, a video produced by Fueling U.S. Forward, a Koch-funded campaign to push fossil fuels. That video represents the group's first public pivot from fossil fuel boosterism to electric vehicle (EV) attacks. More electric vehicle experts are also picking the video apart.
One effort is this video highlighting many of the same falsehoods we wrote about, and which adds key context about some of the video footage. Like, for instance, the fact that the photo that Fueling U.S. Forward claims is a lithium, cobalt or cerium mining operation is actually a copper mine.
By Katherine Paul and Ronnie Cummins
A recent series of articles by a Washington Post reporter could have some consumers questioning the value of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) organic seal. But are a few bad eggs representative of an entire industry?
Consumers are all for cracking down on the fraudulent few who, with the help of Big Food, big retail chains and questionable certifiers give organics a bad name. But they also want stronger standards, and better enforcement—not a plan to weaken standards to accommodate "Factory Farm Organic."