The good, the bad, and the really radioactive

A self-sustaining neighborhood, taking care of  its own power, food, and waste.  Let's do this!

A sustainable cardboard house for the future.

Watching how climate change affects the world, one incident at a time.

A farmer's decades long love affair with soil.

80 percent of the ocean's plastic trash is from land-based sources.

Military veterans are urged not to tell the truth about their experiences to potential recruits.

How ISIS came to be.

Radiation in drinking water acceptable to the EPA.

The EPA proposed Protective Action Guides (PAGs) would allow the general population to drink water hundreds to thousands of times more radioactive than is now legal.

Have a drink.

EPA Now Won’t Finalize Its Study That Showed Fracking May Have Contaminated Groundwater

Sunday drive through the blogosphere

China isn't the only one producing questionable drugs:  Bad pharma: Drug research riddled with half truths, omissions, lies. Industry-funded trials are too common, can't be trusted -- and bring pills to market that likely don't work

State EPA plans to list BPA as harmful

Procter & Gamble Must Scrub Carcinogen Dioxane From Tide

Climate change..  predictions are a lot worse than imagined.

A pet fox.

A Belgian's experience traveling in the US.

If abortion is made illegal... women will have illegal abortions.

What's going on with the banks?

Fondly remembering Mussolini... and forgetting how he ended up.

Farmers who don't give in to monocrops.

Our DNA will become our own computers.

Crafting a homemade book.

The EPA is evil

Because it prevents corporations from poisoning your food, dumping toxic waste, befouling the air. Bring back the good old days when people died from eating canned goods and breathing polluted air!!

...Just how stupid are these people?

WTF?

Watchdog criticizes feds for pulling back on radiation monitoring

An environmental watchdog group is criticizing the federal government for scaling back its radiation monitoring, while simultaneously planning to raise allowable levels of radiation releases in food, water and soil after a nuclear incident.

The group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, issued a press release yesterday condemning the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's decisions.

The EPA and the Food and Drug Administration increased their radiation monitoring efforts after a massive earthquake and tsunami off the coast of Japan set off the world’s worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl.

But on May 3, the EPA announced [PDF] in a press release that it was falling back to a business-as-usual schedule of radiation monitoring, citing “consistently decreasing radiation levels.”
The EPA will begin analyzing milk and drinking water on a quarterly basis, with monthly testing of rainwater.

According to the federal agency, detectable levels "are well below any level of public health concern, and continue to decrease."

But the environmental group isn't buying it.

“With the Japanese nuclear situation still out of control and expected to continue that way for months and with elevated radioactivity continuing to show up in the U.S., it is inexplicable that EPA would shut down its Fukushima radiation monitoring effort,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of the watchdog group, in a statement.

He said the agency found high levels of radiation in drinking water, and now was not the time to be pulling their efforts back.

He also said the EPA’s monitoring program, RadNet, is unreliable and fails to cover large swaths of the West Coast.

A spokesman for the EPA denied Ruch’s allegations.

Harmful chemicals in our environment that never get reported

My bold:

The 33-year old law that was supposed to ensure that Americans know what chemicals are in use around them, and what health and safety hazards they might pose, has produced a regulatory black hole, a place where information goes in – but much never comes out.

The reason is that under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the chemical industry has been allowed to stamp a “trade secret” claim on the identity of two-thirds of all chemicals introduced to the market in the last 27 years, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of data obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These include substances used in numerous consumer and children’s products.

EWG’s analysis also showed that:

* The public has no access to any information about approximately 17,000 of the more than 83,000 chemicals on the master inventory compiled by the EPA.
* Industry has placed “confidential business information” (CBI) claims on the identity of 13,596 new chemicals produced since 1976 – nearly two-thirds of the 20,403 chemicals added to the list in the past 33 years.
* Secrecy claims directly threaten human health. Under section 8(e) of TSCA, companies must turn over all data showing that a chemical presents “a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment.” By definition compounds with 8(e) filings are the chemicals of the greatest health concern. In the first eight months of 2009 industry concealed the identity of the chemicals in more than half the studies submitted under 8(e).
* From 1990 to 2005, the number of confidential chemicals more than quadrupled – from 261 to 1,105 -- on the sub-inventory of substances produced or imported in significant amounts (more than 25,000 pounds a year in at least one facility). In July 2009 the EPA released the identity of 530 of these chemicals, lowering the number of these moderate- and highproduction volume secret chemicals to 575.
* At least 10 of the 151 high volume confidential chemicals produced or imported in amounts greater than 300,000 pounds a year are used in products specifically intended for use by children age 14 or younger.

More:

Americans have no way to learn crucial information about more than 65 percent of new chemicals approved by the U.S. government since 1977, including the substances’ makeup and what health and safety hazards they might pose. Those “details” are being kept secret under federal policies that allow industry to claim that the chemicals’ very existence is a trade secret, the Environmental Working Group has learned.

This cloak of secrecy applies even to chemicals that industry identifies as presenting “a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment.” Under the law, companies must tell EPA anytime they find such a risk. EWG has learned, however, that in the first quarter of this year, industry used confidentiality claims to conceal the identity of more than half the chemicals it reported to Environmental Protection Agency under this requirement.

Since the EPA began keeping an inventory of known chemicals under the weak Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the number of agents declared to be “confidential” has ballooned to nearly 17,000, according to the information the agency provided.

And the Washington Post:

Of the 84,000 chemicals in commercial use in the United States -- from flame retardants in furniture to household cleaners -- nearly 20 percent are secret, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, their names and physical properties guarded from consumers and virtually all public officials under a little-known federal provision.

The policy was designed 33 years ago to protect trade secrets in a highly competitive industry. But critics -- including the Obama administration -- say the secrecy has grown out of control, making it impossible for regulators to control potential dangers or for consumers to know which toxic substances they might be exposed to.

At a time of increasing public demand for more information about chemical exposure, pressure is building on lawmakers to make it more difficult for manufacturers to cloak their products in secrecy. Congress is set to rewrite chemical regulations this year for the first time in a generation.

Under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, manufacturers must report to the federal government new chemicals they intend to market. But the law exempts from public disclosure any information that could harm their bottom line.

Government officials, scientists and environmental groups say that manufacturers have exploited weaknesses in the law to claim secrecy for an ever-increasing number of chemicals. In the past several years, 95 percent of the notices for new chemicals sent to the government requested some secrecy, according to the Government Accountability Office. About 700 chemicals are introduced annually.

Some companies have successfully argued that the federal government should not only keep the names of their chemicals secret but also hide from public view the identities and addresses of the manufacturers.

h/t to Lisa Frack of the Enviroblog.

(Note: I can't label specifics until I get my tags under 5000.... very frustrating and time consuming. So I can't label the TSCA, the EWG, and others... yet.)

Toxic kids

An email from the Sierra Club:

Did you know that babies are being born with more than 300 industrial chemicals in their bodies, many associated with diseases from childhood cancer to birth defects, infertility and learning deficits?

America's toxic chemical safety law fails to protect the most vulnerable in society, kids. It assumes that chemicals are safe and relies on the government to identify dangerous chemicals among the 80,000 on the market. That hasn't worked. Instead, the burden should be on chemical manufacturers to prove that chemicals are safe for infants and children before they enter the marketplace.

California Senator Barbara Boxer has long supported the Kids-Safe Chemicals Act, which will make many important changes to chemical safety law to protect children. Urge her to keep up the good work and pass the bill.

As Chair of the Senate's Environment Committee, Senator Boxer is in a key position to pass legislation to protect kids’ health from toxic chemicals in our food, air and water. The Kids-Safe Chemical Act would put the burden on chemical manufacturers to test chemicals' health effects thoroughly before marketing them, guarantee the public’s right to know about health and safety data, and give the EPA clear authority to ban or restrict chemicals.

Senator Boxer has long been a leader in advocating protection of childrens' health. Urge her to pass the Kids-Safe Chemical Act ASAP.

Thanks for taking action to protect our children's future.

Greg Haegele
Director of Conservation

When you have nothing to lose

You apparently show the nation you don't give a shit:

The Environmental Protection Agency is working on new clean air rules that would allow coal-fired power plants to be built closer to national parks.

It's part of an effort by the Bush administration to put looser environmental regulations in place before leaving office.

*cough* Thanks, Georgie. We'll *cough* be thinking of you after you're gone.

Wait a second.... Just what have you been putting in my food?

And why on earth would we take the word of a corporation during the Bush era?

Institute, WV (AHN) - An explosion at a West Virginia chemical plant Thursday night killed one worker while critically injuring another and produced a fireball seen 12 miles away in Charleston.

The explosion at the Bayer CropScience chemical plant in Institute happened at about 10:30 p.m.

A Bayer official told Kanawha County officials that the three chemicals involved in the explosion were dimethyl disulfide, methylisobutylketone and hexane.

[snip]

Methomyl is is a highly toxic compound in EPA toxicity class I, classified as a restricted use pesticide by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency because of its high acute toxicity to humans, according to a pesticide information profile on the Cornell University website.

Because Methomyl is poisonous to humans, affecting the nervous system through inhalation, as well as contact, when it is used on crops, farm workers are not allowed back into the field for one to seven days depending on the crop.

Methomyl is used on "vegetable, fruit and field crops, cotton, commercial ornamentals, and in and around poultry houses and dairies," and works by inhibiting the proper functioning of the nervous system of insects, according to information from Cornell University.

Officials say no toxic chemicals have been released outside the plant, according to local reports.

When you put a moron in charge...

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is undermining the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to determine health dangers of toxic chemicals by letting nonscientists have a bigger — often secret — role, congressional investigators say in a report obtained by The Associated Press.

The administration's decision to give the Defense Department and other agencies an early role in the process adds to years of delay in acting on harmful chemicals and jeopardizes the program's credibility, the Government Accountability Office concluded.

At issue is the EPA's screening of chemicals used in everything from household products to rocket fuel to determine if they pose serious risk of cancer or other illnesses.

A new review process begun by the White House in 2004 is adding more speed bumps for EPA scientists, the GAO said in its report, which will be the subject of a Senate Environment Committee hearing Tuesday. A formal policy effectively doubling the number of steps was adopted two weeks ago.

Update: via Blue Girl of Blue Girl, Red State:

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration on Friday urged a federal appeals court to stop meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease, but a skeptical judge questioned whether the government has that authority.

The government seeks to reverse a lower court ruling that allowed Kansas-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef to conduct more comprehensive testing to satisfy demand from overseas customers in Japan and elsewhere.

Less than 1 percent of slaughtered cows are currently tested for the disease under Agriculture Department guidelines. The agency argues that more widespread testing does not guarantee food safety and could result in a false positive that scares consumers.

"They want to create false assurances," Justice Department attorney Eric Flesig-Greene told a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

But Creekstone attorney Russell Frye contended the Agriculture Department's regulations covering the treatment of domestic animals contain no prohibition against an individual company testing for mad cow disease, since the test is conducted only after a cow is slaughtered. He said the agency has no authority to prevent companies from using the test to reassure customers.

"This is the government telling the consumers, `You're not entitled to this information,'" Frye said.

It should be evident that the Bush administration really really really is not compassionately conservative... unless that really means drawing the blinds of their house while poor people writhe about on the ground dying from cancer from toxic chemicals or from Alzheimer's from mad cows....

If you change the meaning of the words you use

You can make your own reality!

Declare Abu Ghraib was a resort!:

Talk about bad timing! Just as CACI International was ramping up for its book tour -- the company's CEO has penned "Our Good Name," which according to the flap copy is "CACI's story of facing one of the biggest scandals in recent history...and coming out honorably with its head high" -- an Iraqi man has sued CACI, saying that employees tortured him when he was held in Abu Ghraib.

Be emphatic that science is just a theory and therefore malleable!:

Gray proved himself a fine substitute for Johnson, however. When the senators pressed him on why Johnson had gone along with the White House and overruled the recommendation of the agency's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee in setting a higher level for smog-forming ozone in the air, Gray wanted everyone to understand that it was "actually a very good example" of the "way in which the uncertainty of science plays an important role in decisions." Gray counseled that "science does not give us a single or precise answer."

But Whitehouse didn't seem to be buying it. "The people that you chose to be the experts unanimously supported this recommendation.... These were the best scientists in the country and you ignored them." Gray responded that Johnson hadn't "ignored" them -- he'd just come to a different conclusion. He did allow, however, that in addition to "scientific considerations," there had been "science policy considerations," which are a "part of moving the scientific process forward." But the EPA wouldn't discuss it's communications with the White House, he said, saying that it was important to keep "discussions with the rest of the federal family" private.

Point fingers! It's Congress' fault Bush has made such a mess of things!:

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday criticized Democrats in Congress for their approach to dealing with the nation's housing crisis and soaring energy prices and called anew for an extension of expiring tax cuts and government wiretapping authority.

Bush met at the White House with Republican leaders of Congress and then gave a critique of the Democrats' strategy for dealing with major problems.

When you are asked a direct question, critique the semantics!:

...Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia granted his first broad-based television interview, to Lesley Stahl on CBS’s 60 Minutes. There he explained that the torture of detainees does not violate the 8th Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment” because, according to Scalia, torture is not used as punishment...
[snip]
Scalia’s parsing of the 8th Amendment blindly ignores reports showing that the abuse at Abu Ghraib was about humiliation and punishment, not information-gathering. In 2004, the Washington Post reported MPs involved in the abuse “said detainees were beaten and sexually humiliated as punishment or for fun.” A recent New Yorker profile of one of the soldiers there confirmed that “mostly what interrogators wanted when they asked for ’special treatment’ was punishment: take away his mattress, keep him awake, take away his clothes.”

And when you can't silence the facts, you can just silence the report:

Sanchez writes that he was told by one of the people who'd done the study that when they'd presented their findings to Rumsfeld, he'd "just shut us down" and said "This is not going anywhere." According to Sanchez, the report validated his account that the entire Pentagon leadership knew that he'd had inadequate support when he'd been in command of the U.S. forces in Iraq after the fall of Hussein. It also showed that Gen. Tommy Franks had discarded the original plan, which called for a twelve-to-eighteen-month occupation deployment.

So... when the Democrats have the White House, will the media let these rules still apply? Betcha they won't.

You'll have to put white duct tape all over this post

Because Preznit Bush said there's no global warming and what he says is law:

Washington, D.C. (AHN) - An Environmental Protection Agency chief was given a warning against the potential rejection of California's proposal to enforce it's own carbon emission laws, as doing so would compromise the EPA's credibility, eventually calling for the chief's resignation.

The warning, sent out by Margot Oge, head of the agency's office of transportation and air quality, was directed to EPA Director Stephen Johnson, who was also informed that despite opposing claims, barring California's intentions to enact its own environmental laws had no legal or technical basis.

The documents were among the findings uncovered upon submission of EPA records released Tuesday upon the request of California Sen. Barbara Boxer.

[snip]

The submitted records were in relation to California's ongoing push to enact its own laws regarding greenhouse emission standards, which 16 states have showed intentions of backing up and eventually adopting for their own areas.

[snip]

The LA Times reported that another document showed EPA staff insisting on California's vulnerability to global warming consequences, running counter to Johnson's statement that the state had no "compelling and extraordinary conditions" to earn it its own tailpipe law.

Johnson was accused of making decisions while being swayed by political pressures, an allegation which he denied.

But Johnson is truly a loyal Bushie:

Johnson’s injection of President Bush’s politics into science is notorious. Earlier this year, he censored documents with white duct tape on the EPA’s decision-making process on the California waiver. Asked whether global warming was “a major crisis” facing the world, Johnson replied, “I don’t know what you mean by major crisis.”

Ironically, Boxer said today that the documents revealed an EPA “in crisis.”

Global warming? What global warming? There's no global warming! Ohhhh... THAT global warming...

Hot water from the tap should never be used for cooking or drinking.

Oh. Wow. Thanks:

Lead is rarely found in source water, but can enter it through corroded plumbing. The Environmental Protection Agency says that older homes are more likely to have lead pipes and fixtures, but that even newer plumbing advertised as “lead-free” can still contain as much as 8 percent lead. A study published in The Journal of Environmental Health in 2002 found that tap water represented 14 to 20 percent of total lead exposure.

Scientists emphasize that the risk is small. But to minimize it, the E.P.A. says cold tap water should always be used for preparing baby formula, cooking and drinking. It also warns that boiling water does not remove lead but can actually increase its concentration.

So... don't drink the hot water while you are showering?

And how do you check for lead in your house? Low grades at the elementary school? Are we poisoning our kids by making them drink water? Do they have a test that enables people to check their water supply? WTF?

He'd rather be sued by California than by the auto industries?

WASHINGTON — Environmental Protection Agency head Stephen Johnson was told by staffers that California had a compelling case for the federal Clean Air Act waiver that he later denied and that the agency was likely to lose in court if sued, Sen. Barbara Boxer said Wednesday.

EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar didn't dispute Boxer's conclusions, based on a Senate committee investigation.

"Her staff has been shown all the information unfiltered," Shradar said. "What this shows is that the administrator was provided a wide range of opinions upon which to make his decision. He feels he made the right decision."

Johnson's denial of the waiver stopped California from moving ahead with its tough laws to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Sixteen other states were prepared to follow California's lead had the waiver been issued.

Boxer, D-Calif., heads the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which is investigating the EPA's rejection of the waiver. Under the Clean Air Act, California is the only state that can obtain a waiver allowing it to have tougher emission standards than those imposed by the federal government. But once the waiver is granted, other states can adopt similar rules.

[snip]

Investigators were permitted to look at the full documents and take notes from them, however. At a news conference Wednesday, Boxer released excerpts from the notes showing that EPA staffers apparently believed that California had a solid case for the waiver.

The notes quoted Johnson's briefing memo as saying that the agency was likely to be sued regardless of what decision it reached. The memo said that the EPA was "almost certain to win" if a lawsuit was brought by the auto industry because the waiver had been granted and that the EPA was "likely to lose" a suit brought by California if the waiver was denied.

So... ignoring the added pollution to a state fighting a losing battle with a burgeoning driving population, it was easier to side with the auto manufacturers? Really? Nothing to do with supporting corporations over common sense? Nothing to do with Republican indifference to human suffering? How would letting auto makers make more gas guzzling polluting cars help anyone in the end? They'd rather sue the EPA than go back to the designs they had during the 70s when some cars had 30 to 40 mpg ratings?

The next car I buy will be a fuel efficient one. That means car buyers like me will go to Japanese or other foreign cars. Which hurts the US auto industry. Which apparently they are unable to understand.

Just an hilarious side story: We get several paper deliveries up and down our street, The Los Angeles Times and the local Daily Bulletin, a few New York Times. Usually these papers are thrown out of the windows of old cars in the early morning onto our driveways.

But some nut is driving ... a Hummer ... to deliver papers. A HUMMER.

Words fail me...

Following Dick Cheney's lead

The EPA declares executive privilege and refuses to explain why it said no for the first time in 32 years to California's greenhouse gas regulations:

Invoking executive privilege, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency refused to provide lawmakers Friday with a full explanation of why it rejected California's greenhouse gas regulations.

The EPA informed Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that many of the documents she had requested contained internal deliberations or attorney-client communications that would not be shared with Congress.

"EPA is concerned about the chilling effect that would occur if agency employees believed their frank and honest opinions and analysis expressed as part of assessing California's waiver request were to be disclosed in a broad setting," EPA Associate Administrator Christopher Bliley wrote.

More than a week after a deadline set by Boxer, the agency gave the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which she chairs, a box of papers with large portions of the relevant documents deleted, Boxer said. The documents omitted key details, including a presentation that, according to Senate aides, predicted EPA would lose a lawsuit if it was taken to court for denying California's waiver.

The refusal to provide a full explanation is the latest twist in a congressional investigation into why the EPA denied California permission to impose what would have been the country's toughest greenhouse gas standards on cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles.

Via Nicole Belle of Crooks and Liars, Think Progress points out that Vice President Dick Cheney met with automakers before the EPA denied California's waver. Gee... doesn't this sound familiar?

Anything to keep us guzzling that 100 dollar a barrel crude, huh, Dick?
(crossposted at SteveAudio)

Barbara Boxer takes the EPA to task

Tell EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson to explain why he denied California's waiver request!

Recently, I chaired a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee field hearing in Los Angeles to investigate why the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denied a request from California and 18 other states to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles.

Despite our invitation, EPA Administrator Johnson refused to attend the hearing and explain why, over the unanimous recommendations of technical and legal staffers at the agency, he denied California's common-sense waiver request. He has also failed to respond to the Committee's demand that the EPA release all documents pertaining to the agency's decision.

Join 17,030 Americans and email EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson now: Demand that he release all the documents surrounding his decision to reject California's waiver request!

Our Gropenator is going to sue!

(CNN)-- California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sue the federal government over its decision not to allow a California plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, he announced Thursday.

Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen Johnson announced the decision Wednesday, refusing the state's request for a waiver that would have allowed it to cut emissions faster than a new federal plan the president signed into law Wednesday.

"It's another example of the administration's failure to treat global warming with the seriousness that it actually demands," the governor said at a news conference Thursday.

Bush on Thursday defended the decision of his EPA administrator.

"Is it more effective to let each state make a decision as to how to proceed in curbing greenhouse gases? Or is it more effective to have a national strategy?" he said.

(Bryan of Why Now? predicted this in comments.)

When the hell have you had any kind of nation strategery except to try and break the federal government, Georgie?

Bush demands that California pollute more

The Bush administration's decision to deny California permission to regulate and reduce global warming emissions from cars and trucks is an indefensible act of executive arrogance that can only be explained as the product of ideological blindness and as a political payoff to the automobile industry.

The decision, announced Wednesday by Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, overrode the advice of his legal and technical staffs, misconstrued the law and defied both Congress and the federal courts. It also stuck a thumb in the eyes of 17 other state governors who have grown impatient with the federal government's failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and wanted to move aggressively on their own.

The Clean Air Act of 1970 gave California authority to set its own clean air standards if it first received a federal waiver. The law also said that other states could then adopt California's standards. In 2004, California asked permission to move ahead with a law requiring automakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from new cars and light trucks by 30 percent by 2016. That would require improvements in fuel economy far beyond those called for in the energy bill signed this week.

Over the years, California has made 50 waiver requests to regulate smog-forming pollutants and other gases and has never been denied. This was the first request involving emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which the Bush administration has steadfastly refused to regulate.

Hmmm. Bush doesn't really seem sincere about global warming and alternate energy sources, does he? How strange....

There goes FEMA's plan

Of gassing the poor to death:


(photo taken from article.)

The Federal Emergency Management Agency since early 2006 has suppressed warnings from its own field workers about health problems experienced by hurricane victims living in government-provided trailers with levels of a toxic chemical 75 times the recommended maximum for U.S. workers, congressional lawmakers said yesterday.

A trail of e-mails obtained by investigators shows that the agency's lawyers rejected a proposal for systematic testing of the levels of potentially cancer-causing formaldehyde gas in the trailers, out of concern that the agency would be legally liable for any hazards or health problems. As many as 120,000 families displaced by hurricanes Katrina and Rita lived in the suspect trailers, and hundreds have complained of ill effects.

[snip]

FEMA tested new trailers last September and October after rejecting more stringent standards suggested by the Environmental Protection Agency, Waxman said. In May, the agency reported finding formaldehyde in those trailers at 1.2 parts per million, but it said levels dropped to 0.3 parts per million after four days of ventilation.

FEMA said that met a standard used by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for its manufactured homes. But Paulison said yesterday that FEMA now recognizes that ventilating trailers is impractical during the Gulf Coast's summer heat and humidity. Lawmakers noted that FEMA issued the advice at the beginning of last summer.

Mary C. DeVany, an occupational health and safety engineer advising the Sierra Club, testified that the exposure limit of 0.3 parts per million is 400 times the normal limit for year-round exposure set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. DeVany called the move a "misapplication and skewing of scientific results . . . to minimize adverse health effects."

Who made money on this deal? Follow the money and you'll find one of Bush's fat cronies. Make him pay it back. All of it.

Update: Eli of Multi Medium has more on why FEMA decided not to test for formaldehyde in the trailers.

Gropenator Ahnold

Is doing at least one thing right, pushing California to be green. The recent California fires:

...to Linda Adams, who heads California's Environmental Protection Agency, it is only a sign of things to come.

"We can expect a lot more of this. More fires, more drought. This is global warming," says Ms Adams.

While the administration of President George W Bush has been accused of wilfully ignoring climate change, the State of California has already taken unilateral action.

[snip]

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has charged Ms Adams with implementing what she calls "the most comprehensive law in the world to reduce greenhouse gas emissions".

She is referring to Assembly Bill 32 (AB32), or the Global Warming Solutions Act, passed last year by California's Democratic-led assembly, with the backing of the governor, a Republican.

[snip]

The legislation obliges California to cut emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020. Work has begun on quantifying the level of emissions, after which a cap will be enforced, and industries will be able to buy and sell permits allowing a certain amount of pollution.

[snip]

While California's law has yet to be implemented fully, it is already being used as a template for nationwide action that American environmentalists hope will turn their country from a laggard on climate change, to a leader.

Fabian Nunez, the speaker of California's state parliament, says that was exactly the intention.

"If you look at Congress and the White House you would think that climate change is not a big issue with Americans, but that is false. The growing awareness about climate change across America has been incredible," he says.

"The intent for us when we passed AB32 was not only our commitment to California; there is a sense of state activism.

"When you look around and see that our president has essentially turned a blind eye to the issue of climate change, it raises a lot of concerns. So we wanted to help put the pressure on the federal government, and we think that's worked quite well thus far.

Update: Other things Ahnold is not doing so well.

Cookie Jill from skippy the bush kangaroo:

gov. seeks to cut mental services for homeless

a nationally lauded program that has helped thousands of mentally ill homeless men and women break the cycle of psychiatric hospitalization, jail time and street life is now on gov. arnold schwarzenegger's list of budget cuts.