In his article “Environment Group Aims to Stop Work on Power Plant”, Tom Parsons reports on two unnamed environmental groups who are asking the Arkansas Supreme Court to order that all work on a new power plant cease until further environmental studies have been completed. This article is written in the inverted pyramid style (nice use of a related term). This style presents the most important information first, drawing readers to the headlines and opening paragraphs, and also allowing the editors to remove content from the bottom of articles in order to meet the space requirements of print media. In the power plant article, all of the most basic facts are presented in the first paragraph. “Two environmental groups have asked a federal court to halt work on a coal-fired power plant near Fulton in southwest Arkansas, arguing that proper assessments of the plant's effect on valuable wetlands were never done.” (Parsons 1). This single paragraph answers who, what, why and where. The following paragraphs flesh out these elements, and present views from both sides of the issue, in order ...
The Grassy Narrows people have a long, deeply rooted history in the environmental justices movement. Rodgers (2009) points to a number of environmental justice struggles such as the fight against the harmful effects of mercury poisoning and the Minamata disease associated with it (para. 1-3), the Ontario Hydro dams that destroyed part of the wild rice harvest and degraded the habitat of fish and fur animals, as well as the displacement of the community (due to relocation into prefabricated houses where electricity and running water were promised) and the culture shock it created (para. 4). He also discusses the successful blockade in 2002, which is the longest-lasting blockade in Canadian history (para. 28)—an example that shows how employing legal methods were critical in the struggle against environmental injustices for this community. There are a number of other issues that will be discussed in the following paragraphs; the above are just a few of the injustices the Grassy Narrows community face.
Protecting Hawaii’s rain forest from the invasion of Corporate America is Bill McKibben’s intention as an environmentalist. His 28-paragraph article, “Power Play Endangers Hawaii’s Rain Forest,” appeared in Rolling Stone, a popular culture magazine, on May 31, 1990. He argues that producing power through geothermal drilling harms the Wao Kele o Puna rain forest, the environment, and the people that live nearby. He also presents alternative methods for power, hoping that people will consider these, such as solar-water heating systems and energy efficient gadgets. Unfortunately, his elevated, subjective stance and attempt to convince his audience through emotion distracts the reader from considering the other side of the argument because he appears to be a reliable, educated author.
This paper will discuss the effects of Keystone XL Pipeline project and how the findings of the research might be beneficial to the United States. The first point of argument will be the negative impact of the Keystone Pipeline to America’s economy and the environment. The second point of view will be the positive impact of Keystone Pipeline to America’s economy. Keystone XL Pipeline is TransCanada’s tar-sand transportation project. The pipeline is supposed to cut across America to be linked with Canada’s tar-sand mines. It is aimed at increasing energy security in America. However, the project has received a lot of criticism from both the citizens and environmentalists for climate reasons (Mendelsohn and Dinar 154). To understand the implications of Keystone XL Pipeline, it is important to look at its environmental and economic impacts to the United States.
Removal of the mountaintops causes environmental impacts from blasting. The blasting has caused rocks to be deposited into valleys on the hillsides, burying almost 2,000 miles of streams which feed the Mississippi River. Slurry, the residue which is used to clean the coal can wash into groundwater and may contain arsenic, lead, manganese, iron, sodium, strontium, and sulfate. A recent research study is beginning to link these environmental impacts to the grave health concerns in the Appalachian communities. During most of the Mountaintop removal mining’s history coal industries have been able to obtain permits easily to operate, but once under the Obama administration Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) those permits now take more time to obtain. The permit process requires all applications to be reviewed before being given out to coal
This Paper will describe and analyze three articles pertaining to the ongoing debate for and against Glen Canyon Dam. Two of these articles were found in the 1999 edition of A Sense of Place, and the third was downloaded off a site on the Internet (http://www.glencanyon.net/club.htm). These articles wi...
Exxon/Mobil, one of the nation’s leading oil producers, has its main refinery located in Beaumont, Texas. Each year, the residents of Beaumont/Port Arthur have to contend with the 39,000 pounds of pollution spewed each year by the Exxon refinery. Exxon’s emissions are 385% above the state refinery average. In 1999, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Committee (TNRCC) allowed the plant to increase their emissions, without allowing the public to have a say in the matter. Interestingly, 95% of the people living near the plant are of African American descent and are in the poverty range. Some believe that this, along with the lack of education in the area, allows Exxon to get away with such high emissions. Residents in nearby neighborhoods have been complaining of headaches, nausea, eye, and throat irritation for years. Since 1997, Mobil has repeatedly violated health standards in its emissions of two key air pollutants: sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, These “rotten egg” smells are so strong, one can smell it through a car driving past the refinery. After numerous complaints and one record of a refinery worker becoming unconscious because of the fumes, the EPA awarded Exxon with a $100,000 environmental justice grant in October of 1998. Hopefully, Exxon has put the money to good use and cleaned up their emissions.
Lewis, Renee. “Environmentalists Say Strong Legal Case Could Derail Keystone XL Permit.” Reuters. N.p., 1 Feb. 2014. Web. 7 Mar. 2014.
Spiegal, Jan E. "Unsound Proposal?: Concern On The Coast, Classical Conflict Again Unfolds: Energy vs. Environment." Hartford Courant 16 Oct. 2005, 3 Stars/Final ed., sec. A. Bigchalk Database. 8 Nov. 2005.
The environment and the health of the surrounding population go hand in hand. The Environmental Protection Agency takes on this ever so important mission of protecting them both. The mission statement of the EPA states, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Small Business Programs is to support the protection of human health and the environment by advocating and advancing the business, regulatory, and environmental compliance concerns of small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses, and minority academic institutions (US Enviromental Protection Agency, 2010).” The impact of its mission can be defined clearly as it examines the impact of contamination in the air, the water, and the land on human health.
The author discusses the enticement to political groups because of geoengineering’s alleged potential to reverse global warming rapidly and cheaply, as he presents concern regarding the significant risks and the threat of technology gone wrong. The author looks at the basic authority issues raised by geoengineering, its possible functions, governance, and specifically addresses inadequate research funding, rejection, and unilateral vs individual action. Bodansky is a professor at Arizona State University Sandra Day O 'Connor College of Law and has written three books and dozens of articles and book chapters on international law, international environmental law and climate change policy. This article will be a useful tool in discovering
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (2005) defines mountaintop removal as “a mining practice where the tops of mountains are removed, exposing the seams of coal.” Coal companies throughout Appalachia adopted this process as a means of acquiring coal faster. People in support of mountaintop removal concentrate, not only on the cheap, plentiful energy which is produced, but also the supposed increase in safer occupation opportunities for miners. Such individuals also argue that flattened land provides space for airports, prisons, and shopping centers. However, mountaintop removal has serious consequences, which need to be revealed.
Nuclear Energy has many proponents and much opposition. Many of the groups that oppose nuclear power have legitimate concerns, mainly with the dangers of nuclear material in relation with human health concerns and environmental troubles that are risked by allowing nuclear power plants to increase in number. Yet, many of these opposition groups have made outspoken and radical claims about the “hidden” motives of why nuclear power is promoted and subsidized by our federal government. For example, The Nuclear Information and Resource Service claim that the federal government has the intention of committing genocide against Native Americans because uranium mining is predominantly done on reservations. Another cry out by nuclear power opponents is the constant reliving of the few nuclear mishaps that occurred decades ago, at Chernobyl or Three Mile Island. No doubt, past accidents have happened worldwide and are important reminders to not play around with nuclear material, but technology has improved as well, a fact opponents fail to consider. Many of these organizations feel that other sources should be used to supply America’s energy needs. These types of statements tag many opponents to nuclear energy as misinformed, out of touch with scientific facts, or just closed minded to the whole concept of nuclear power. On the other hand, the proponents of nuclear energy like President Bush see it as cheap, and environmentally friendly. As a result, President Bush passed the Comprehensive Energy Bill in 2005 that would increase production of all types of energy, including nuclear, by giving subsidies and tax breaks to nuclear power producers. Keeping safe America’s capabilities for generating electric power by way of nuclear e...
The Criminal Process in Environmental Regulation. (n.d.). UH Law. Retrieved April 6, 2014, from http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/thester/courses/Environmental-Practicum-2014/syllabus/chap6.pdf
Today’s mainstream media has a deep influence on numerous aspects of economical and social life, it provides information and data almost on everything that happens on our planet. Mainstream media became one of the most important and influential instruments in our society, as the news stories reach a large numbers of people in a short time. Different people are using mainstream media as a first source of information; humans need the information, which is why there is a great deal of trust on media. We follow the news because it is our duty as citizens to be informed; it gives us the facts that help us make the right decisions and also gives us something to talk about. The media has a great public responsibility in front of their audience; therefore, they are expected to provide information that is accurate, reliable and free from bias. It is essential that the public is truly informed about the controversial topics on environmental issues, like DDT and GMOs. Media informs the public with regard to science and technology, which further impacts policy making within the society. The drawback with today’s mainstream media is that it tends to provide information that is far from what is happening in the real world. Current news media misrepresent some news report in order to gain attention and they omit the most important news from television, newspapers or radio that the public deserves to know. The articles “Environmentalism for the 21st Century” by Dr. Patrick Moore, “Rachel Carson’s Environmental Genocide” by Lisa Makson, “Lawrence Solomon: For global warming believers, 2013 was the year from Hell” by Lawrance Solomon and “Global warming at work: how climate change affects the economy and labour” by Raveena Aulakh will be discussed ...
About a million people around the world seemed to enjoy the hilarious yet tragic scenes of cooling towers crumbling. Ecotricity, a British (and the country’s first) green energy company, which was founded in 1996, released a short clip via YouTube on February 7, 2012, attracting over 3.4 million views as of September 2016. Ecotricity’s central goal is to confront and bash the bad behavior of the Big Six power companies in the UK – British Gas, EDF Energy, npower, E. ON UK, Scottish Power, and SSE. The Big Six has been notoriously known for “unethical pricing, awful customer service, and the dire lack of investment in new sources of green energy,” (Ecotricity, ¶8) yet it supplies gas and electricity to a large majority of British homes and businesses.