North Dakota Fails to Disclose Hundreds of Oil Spills to the Public
A September oil pipeline spill is calling into question North Dakota’s lack of disclosure laws, which have allowed nearly 300 spills in the last few years to go unreported in the burgeoning oil state.
In 2012 and 2013, roughly 300 pipeline spills in the state went unreported, according to an Associated Press (AP) report that also uncovered roughly 750 oil incidents that had previously not been publicized.
According to state law, that’s just fine. There are no regulations in North Dakota regarding the disclosure of oil spills to the public.
The AP report comes just weeks after a North Dakota farmer uncovered a pipeline rupture on his land. Steven Jensen discovered the actual site of the pipeline spill after days of smelling oil. Jensen immediately reported the incident, he told the AP, but the pipeline’s owner, Tesoro Logistics, took a day to arrive on the scene.
At that point, more than seven acres of Jensen’s land were destroyed in what is considered one of the largest inland oil spills in the U.S. In all, 20,000 barrels—or 800,000 gallons—of crude oil leaked onto his farmland.
The incident was reported to the National Response Center on Oct. 8. News of the spill didn’t break for two days, and finally made headlines on Oct. 10—11 days after the initial report by Jensen was filed.
For those living in the state, this is a problem on a number of different levels. Not only did the regulators fail to notify the public, but there are also questions over whether the spill had any environmental consequences. Tesoro Logistics claims the spill did not result in any contamination of soil or groundwater.
Environmental organization Dakota Resource Council isn’t buying it.
“First, why was the public not informed about such a significant oil spill until Oct. 10? That is a long time since September 29, when the spill was reportedly discovered, to have kept the public in the dark about what was happening,” the organization stated in a press release. “Second, from all accounts in the media thus far, state officials and company spokespeople have said that the spill has not caused any adverse damages to the environment. This defies logic and common sense. Productive agricultural land—seven football fields in size—is covered in oil and the official response is no environmental damage?”
Officials Aren’t Spilling
Currently, all spills that have the possibility of tainting water sources must be reported to the North Dakota Department of Health. According to its website, reporting the incident is mandatory. However, penalties for failing to do so are not listed.
The Health Department has indicated it will take a more aggressive approach in releasing information on oil spills. Following the Jensen farm incident, Dennis Fewless, the Health Department director for water quality, told the AP his department was looking into revisions to its policies regarding oil spills.
On Friday, the Department of Health indicated it would test out a reporting website, which would provide an accessible database for the public to monitor reported oil spills in the state. As it stands now, the public does not have access to those reports.
Creating a system that allows for transparency isn’t supported by everyone.
According to AllGov, the state’s Department of Mineral Resources director Lynn Helms worries that reporting each and every oil spill, regardless of size, will create unnecessary concern.
That’s echoed by North Dakota Department of Health’s Kris Roberts, who is working on the Jensen farm oil spill cleanup effort with Tesoro Logistics. From his perspective, alerting the public every time a spill occurs isn’t the best use of time and resources, particularly if they’re not yet aware of the ramifications of the spill.
“It’s on top of a low hill, in the middle of a wheat field, in an area with no residents at all,” Roberts told the LA Times. “The public has a right to know. But do I have a responsibility to run out and tell the public every time there’s a spill that isn’t going to threaten them or the environment, and that the company is aggressively cleaning up?”
Yet for those who are concerned about receiving an accurate depiction of what is happening in the state, that’s backwards logic.
“The public really should know about these,” Dakota Resource Council Director Don Morrison told AllGov. “If there is a spill, sometimes a landowner may not even know about it. And if they do, people think it’s an isolated incident that’s only happening to them.”
Morrison’s organization takes issue with an industry that, in their eyes, lacks effective regulation.
“This latest spill should put to rest the calls for fewer regulations,” the organization states in a press release, referring to the Jensen farm spill. “It is hard to imagine how fewer regulations would have prevented this spill, made it more transparent to the public or sped up the cleanup. It also puts the spotlight on current state government claims that it is uniquely qualified to deal with energy development in our state.”
Other states that are in the midst of oil booms do have databases the public can consult for oil spills. In Colorado, where fracking has taken off, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, a division of the state’s Natural Resources department, is responsible for providing permits and monitoring the fracking industry, publishes spill reports on its website.
Leak Questions Still Unanswered
The industry has long stated that oil pipelines provide a safe way to transport oil and natural gas throughout the U.S., yet the cases in North Dakota call that argument into question.
While many of the 300 pipeline spills over the last two years in the state have remained relatively small, they’ve still occurred—exposing farmland and water sources to crude oil, which has the capability of contaminating soil and water.
Most pipelines are fitted with technology that monitors fluid flow, capable of detecting when a spill is occurring. The technology recognizes imbalances in fluid, and sends out an alert when such imbalances are detected. But the technology doesn’t always work.
In cases where leaks are relatively small, oil spills can go for weeks without detection. In the case of the Jensen farm oil spill, Tesoro Logistics is still unable to answer how long the spill occurred—all Jensen knows is that he smelled oil days before his tractor traveled over a contaminated patch, which will him to the source of the leak.
The controversy in North Dakota, which is the second largest oil producing state in the nation, comes in the midst of the Keystone XL pipeline controversy. The proposed 1,800-mile pipeline would pump Canadian tar sands from Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico, passing through some of the nation’s richest farmland.
Abbi Harrington-Kleinschmidt, a Nebraska farmer whose land sits along the proposed Keystone route, told Mint Press News in July that she and her fellow Nebraska farmers would do all they could to fight Keystone. Like others, she’s concerned about the potential for oil spills on her land, which she considers to be some of the best soil in the nation.
“It just goes right to my core, probably because of the legacy that ties to my family for five generations,” she told Mint Press News. “And knowing that my ancestors who worked so hard—and my sisters and I, who have shed a lot of blood, sweat and tears on that farm too. What’s so upsetting is that a foreign corporation can threaten to come and take your land from you with such a dangerous pipeline.”
President Barack Obama has the final say on the pipeline’s approval. A date for his decision has not yet been made, although it is expected within the year.
Visit EcoWatch’s PIPELINES page for more related news on this topic.
By Suzanne Cords
One day Lizzie, the first-person narrator of the novel, receives an old book as a gift, with a dedication wishing the reader to be among the survivors. Like the preppers who build bunkers and stockpile supplies in remote areas to be ready for the end of the world, Lizzie is convinced that the end of the world is definitely near in times of a threatening climate disaster.
Lizzie, who lives in New York with her husband and son, is a university campus librarian. She worries about almost everything: her brother, an ex-junkie, or her dental insurance and the future in the face of the apocalypse. She is obsessed with reading reference books and articles about climate change.
She also devours words of wisdom, including about Buddhist spirituality: "A visitor once asked the old monks on Mount Athos what they did all day, and was told: We have died and we are in love with everything." But nothing can lift her spirits.
'Lizzie Is Just Like Us'
Lizzie observes rich New Yorkers plan their move to regions that are less threatened by climate change, something she simply cannot afford. Sometimes she watches disaster movies, which lead her to worry even more.
Above all, she is a gifted observer of her fellow human beings. "Young person worry: What if nothing I do matters? Old person worry: What if everything I do, does?"
Lizzie, the U.S. author told DW, is a bit like the rest of us — well aware of the climate crisis, but because she cares and worries about so many other things, that awareness falls by the wayside. That's how she felt herself, Jenny Offill said, but the more she looked into the issue, the more she saw a need for action on her part, too.
"I also was trying to see if there was a way to make it funny, because, you know, so much of the world of prepping and imagining disaster is actually sort of strangely funny."
The novel was shortlisted for the 2020 UK's Women's Prize for Fiction and has now been released in German translation.
Climate Activist With a Vision
But then, there is also this serious, scientifically based concern about what climate change means. In the past, says Offill, artists were the ones who would predict disasters; today it's the experts, as well as the students she teaches. In the end, their fears and their justified anger motivated her to take a closer look at the issue. Today, she is a climate activist herself, and is involved in initiatives along with many other artists.
Lizzie, the heroine of Weather, hasn't gotten that far. But she voices her fears, and that's a start. "Of course, the world continues to end," says Sylvia, a mentor of Lizzie's, at one point — and commences to water her garden. There is hope after all.
Reposted with permission from Deutsche Welle.
- 16 Essential Books About Environmental Justice, Racism and ... ›
- The Newest Books by Women Fighting the Climate Crisis - EcoWatch ›
- 10 Best Books On Climate Change, According to Activists - EcoWatch ›
By Jake Johnson
A federal appeals court on Tuesday dealt the final blow to former President Donald Trump's attempt to open nearly 130 million acres of territory in the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans to oil and gas drilling.
Though the Trump administration appealed the ruling, President Joe Biden revoked his predecessor's 2017 order shortly after taking office, rendering the court case moot. On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to dismiss the Trump administration's appeal.
"Because the terms of the challenged Executive Order are no longer in effect, the relevant areas of the [Outer Continental Shelf] in the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea, and Atlantic Ocean will be withdrawn from exploration and development activities," the court said in its order.
Erik Grafe of Earthjustice, which represented a coalition of advocacy groups that challenged Trump's order, said in a statement that "we welcome today's decision and its confirmation of President Obama's legacy of ocean and climate protection."
"As the Biden administration considers its next steps, it should build on these foundations, end fossil fuel leasing on public lands and waters, and embrace a clean energy future that does not come at the expense of wildlife and our natural heritage," Grafe continued. "One obvious place for immediate action is America's Arctic, including the Arctic Refuge and the Western Arctic, which the previous administration sought to relegate to oil development in a series of last-minute decisions that violate bedrock environmental laws."
VICTORY: 9th Circuit ends fight over President Trump's illegal attempt to open up 128 million acres of Atlantic & A… https://t.co/TvYVt2F1jO— Earthjustice (@Earthjustice)1618347073.0
In January, Biden ordered a temporary pause on new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters, a decision environmentalists hailed as a positive step that should be made permanent.
"We call on President Biden to keep his promise: a full and complete ban on fracking and fossil fuel extraction on public lands. Full stop," Food & Water Watch policy director Mitch Jones said at the time. "The climate crisis requires it and he promised it."
Reposted with permission from Common Dreams.
- Biden Urged to Ban ANWR Drilling After Court Approves Leases ... ›
- Court Rejects Trump's Arctic Drilling Proposal in 'Huge Victory for ... ›
- Coast Guard Makes Dire Warning About Drilling in the Arctic ... ›
- Will Oil Companies Drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ... ›
By 2035, every new car and truck sold in the U.S. could be an EV, a new report says.
Accelerations in technology and especially battery affordability, paired with new policy, mean the dramatic transition would save American drivers $2.7 trillion by 2050, an average savings of $1,000 per household per year.
The ramp up in EV production would also create 2 million new jobs by 2035. Battery prices have fallen 74% since 2014, and their unexpectedly rapid fall is a key driver of the cost savings.
EVs are far simpler mechanically, and more efficient, than internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, which translates to reduced climate pollution and lower costs for consumers.
Strengthened vehicle efficiency standards and investment in fast charging infrastructure are needed to accelerate the transition, which would prevent 150,000 premature deaths and save $1.3 trillion in health environmental costs by 2050.
For a deeper dive:
Thousands of Superfund sites exist around the U.S., with toxic substances left open, mismanaged and dumped. Despite the high levels of toxicity at these sites, nearly 21 million people live within a mile of one of them, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Currently, more than 1,300 Superfund sites pose a serious health risk to nearby communities. Based on a new study, residents living close to these sites could also have a shorter life expectancy.
Published in Nature Communications, the study, led by Hanadi S. Rifai, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Houston, and a team of researchers, found that living in nearby zip codes to Superfund sites resulted in a decreased life expectancy of more than two months, the University of Houston reported.
"We have ample evidence that contaminant releases from anthropogenic sources (e.g., petrochemicals or hazardous waste sites) could increase the mortality rate in fence-line communities," Rifai told the University of Houston. "Results showed a significant difference in life expectancy among census tracts with at least one Superfund site and their neighboring tracts with no sites."
The study pulled data from 65,000 census tracts – defined geographical regions – within the contiguous U.S., The Guardian reported. With this data, researchers found that for communities that are socioeconomically challenged, this life expectancy could decrease by up to a year.
"It was a bit surprising and concerning," Rifai told The Guardian. "We weren't sure [when we started] if the fact that you are socioeconomically challenged would make [the Superfund's effects] worse."
The research team, for example, found that the presence of a Superfund site in a census tract with a median income of less than $52,580 could reduce life expectancy by seven months, the University of Houston reported.
Many of these toxic sites were once used as manufacturing sites during the Second World War. Common toxic substances that are released from the sites into the air and surface water include lead, trichlorethylene, chromium, benzene and arsenic – all of which can lead to health impacts, such as neurological damage among children, The Union of Concerned Scientists wrote in a blog.
"The EPA has claimed substantial recent progress in Superfund site cleanups, but, contrary to EPA leadership's grandiose declarations, the backlog of unfunded Superfund cleanups is the largest it has been in the last 15 years," the Union wrote.
Delayed cleanup could become increasingly dangerous as climate change welcomes more natural hazards, like wildfires and flooding. According to a Government Accountability Office report, for example, climate change could threaten at least 60 percent of Superfund sites in the U.S., AP News reported.
During the summer of 2018, a major wildfire took over the Iron Mountain Superfund site near Redding, CA, ruining wastewater treatment infrastructure that is responsible for capturing 168 million gallons of acid mine drainage every month, NBC News reported.
"There was this feeling of 'My God. We ought to have better tracking of wildfires at Superfund locations,'" Stephen Hoffman, a former senior environmental scientist at the EPA, told NBC News. "Before that, there wasn't a lot of thought about climate change and fire. That has changed."
In the study, researchers also looked at the impacts of floodings on Superfund sites, which could send toxins flowing into communities and waterways.
"When you add in flooding, there will be ancillary or secondary impacts that can potentially be exacerbated by a changing future climate," Rifai told the University of Houston. "The long-term effect of the flooding and repetitive exposure has an effect that can transcend generations."
- Biden Faces Pressure to Tackle 'Unfunded' Toxic Waste Sites ... ›
- Do You Live Near One of the 1,300 Most Toxic Sites in America ... ›
- EPA Adds Prison Locations to Its Environmental Justice Mapping ... ›
- EPA: Houston Superfund Site Leaked Toxic Chemicals After Harvey ... ›
A weather research station on a bluff overlooking the sea is closing down because of the climate crisis.
The National Weather Service (NWS) station in Chatham, Massachusetts was evacuated March 31 over concerns the entire operation would topple into the ocean.
"We had to say goodbye to the site because of where we are located at the Monomoy Wildlife Refuge, we're adjacent to a bluff that overlooks the ocean," Boston NWS meteorologist Andy Nash told WHDH at the time. "We had to close and cease operations there because that bluff has significantly eroded."
Chatham is located on the elbow of Cape Cod, a land mass extending out into the Atlantic Ocean that has been reshaped and eroded by waves and tides over tens of thousands of years, The Guardian explained. However, sea level rise and extreme weather caused by the climate crisis have sped that change along.
"It's an extremely dynamic environment, which is obviously a problem if you are building permanent infrastructure here," Andrew Ashton, an associate scientist at Cape-Cod based Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, told The Guardian. "We are putting our foot on the accelerator to make the environment even more dynamic."
This was the case with the Chatham weather station. It used to be protected from the drop into the ocean by about 100 feet of land. However, storm action in 2020 alone washed away as much as six feet of land a day.
"We'd know[n] for a long time there was erosion but the pace of it caught everyone by surprise," Nash told The Guardian. "We felt we had maybe another 10 years but then we started losing a foot of a bluff a week and realized we didn't have years, we had just a few months. We were a couple of storms from a very big problem."
The Chatham station was part of a network of 92 NWS stations that monitor temperature, pressure, humidity, wind speed and direction and other data in the upper atmosphere, The Cape Cod Chronicle explained. The stations send up radiosondes attached to weather balloons twice a day to help with weather research and prediction. The Chatham station, which had been observing this ritual for the past half a century, sent up its last balloon the morning of March 31.
"We're going to miss the observations," Nash told The Cape Cod Chronicle. "It gives us a snapshot, a profile of the atmosphere when the balloons go up."
The station was officially decommissioned April 1, and the two buildings on the site will be demolished sometime this month. The NWS is looking for a new location in southeastern New England. In the meantime, forecasters will rely on data from stations in New York and Maine.
Nash said the leavetaking was bittersweet, but inevitable.
"[M]other nature is evicting us," he told The Cape Cod Chronicle.