People Before Profit blog

After gas explosion, Chevron offers victims free pizza

Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:54:00 +0000

On Feb. 11, a natural gas well owned by Chevron in southwestern Pennsylvania caught fire and exploded, injuring one worker and leaving another dead. It shook the nearby rural community of Bobtown and released methane into the atmosphere, and while the corporation assures the levels are not high enough to present a danger, many remain skeptical.

But the real insult Chevron added to the injury was what the company offered to the people of Bobtown as compensation for their trouble: certificates for a free pizza and two-liter soft drink.

The Chevron-owned fracking well, which had been deemed ready to begin production, instead shot flames into the air with a powerful boom, starting a fire that burned intensely for four days afterward before it was extinguished. This isn't the first time Bobtown and its surrounding area have been plagued by Chevron's nearby fracking operations, but this is certainly the worst incident that has affected the small town so far. Residents had previously reported foul odors, drinking water polluted with fracking-related chemicals, sick pets and livestock, and physical conditions including headaches, nausea, and skin rashes.

This time, the corporation decided to handle matters in a most condescending manner, dispensing a total of 100 gift certificates, along with an apology letter, from Chevron's "community outreach team." The supposedly compensatory gesture, presented just after the death of one of the company's own workers, did not please residents. They were more interested in knowing about the negative health and environmental effects of the natural gas operations than getting a free pizza and a soft drink.

"It felt like a huge slap in the face," said one resident who wished to remain anonymous. He received one of the gift certificates on Feb. 16 and said it was the first and last time he heard from Chevron regarding the incident. "I do not feel that they've addressed anything. I haven't even called their hotline yet because I'm just too upset. A pizza coupon? I mean, come on!"

In a statement to CNN, Chevron claimed it was offering "a token of appreciation" to the residents affected by the explosion. That the corporation actually seems to believe this to be acceptable compensation in the first place is an example of the abyssal disconnect between profit-driven energy companies and working class people.

Pennsylvania has a recent troubled history with the disastrous effects of fracking, even as right-wing Gov. Tom Corbett seeks to make the state "the Texas of the natural gas boom." In 2013, the DEP received 398 complaints alleging that gas or oil drilling had polluted or otherwise affected water. And Bobtown is not the only town whose residents have complained that nearby fracking activity has made them feel sick.

The gas well has now been successfully capped. The cause of the fire and explosion remains unknown, and work is being done to investigate. But those who question the toxicity levels of the methane it released are not entirely off base. According to Scott Perry, deputy secretary for oil and gas management with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), a nearby gas monitor detected enough methane in the air to deem the area around the explosion "a potential hot zone." He added, "It's still within safe ranges, but we need to employ an abundance of caution here."

Photo: AP

Report shows strong public support for Endangered Species Act

Fri, 21 Feb 2014 16:43:00 +0000

Though it has come under attack from the right wing, Americans by and large value and support the Endangered Species Act, as well as the wildlife it protects. And on Feb. 19, the Center for Biological Diversity delivered a report to Congress to prove it.

The report was based on a poll the organization conducted, which found that two out of three U.S. citizens want the Endangered Species Act either strengthened or simply left alone, but not circumvented or weakened. Called A Wild Success, the 282-page report includes more than 200 letters and op-eds written by activists, politicians, workers and other Americans who praised the law and the importance of maintaining it. Specifically, 42 percent of Americans believe the act should be improved, 25 percent simply want it to be left alone, and only 24 percent believe it should be weakened. Fifty percent, meanwhile, think the country has not done enough to protect wildlife.

"The message is crystal clear," said Brett Hartl, endangered species policy director with the Center for Biological Diversity. "The vast majority of Americans support endangered species and the Endangered Species Act. Congress must do everything in its power to protect it. The fact is, it has a 99 percent success rate in preventing extinction for wildlife under its care and has helped protect millions of acres of wildlife habitat. It's hard to argue with that kind of success."

The law, which experienced its 40th anniversary in December 2013, has been the focal point of renewed legislative attacks from Republicans, and has recently become a rallying point for activists concerned about the welfare of endangered animals and plants. The number of species listed by the law has been truncated since 2001, due to revisions that dictated only the current locations of endangered animals be considered, rather than the former. This meant that species whose numbers are still low can no longer be restored to former habitats; this arguably circumvents the overall efficacy of the act itself. In addition, funding for enforcement of the act has been repeatedly slashed by Congress.

With the delivery of this report, an uptick in the fight to preserve the law is expected to follow, as more activists become aware of what is happening. And there is certainly a scientific basis for the argument to keep the Endangered Species Act around: Scientists estimate that without it, at least 227 species would likely have gone extinct since the law's passage.

Pulitzer Prize-winning environmental journalist Robert B. Semple Jr., who authored one of the op-eds collected in the center's report, said of the efforts to crush the act, "Right-wing critics of the law like to point out that less than two percent of the 1,500 or so animal and plant species listed as endangered or threatened under the law have actually recovered to the point where they can be removed from the list. But most of those species, once headed for extinction, can hardly be expected to rebuild healthy, sustainable populations overnight."

And, he noted, "the Act has saved the bald eagle, the peregrine falcon, the California condor, the American alligator, the Florida panther, and the gray wolf," though the latter is once more under attack.

He added, "Since the Endangered Species Act has widespread public support, it seems unthinkable that Congress would roll it back. But with this Congress, you never know."

He remarked that when it was first passed, the legislation was detested by corporations "for elevating the needs of nature above the needs of commerce." Semple believed "the act would stand zero chance of passage in today's poisoned political climate."

George Fenwick, president of nonprofit organization American Bird Conservancy, remarked, "When this law is allowed to work as it was designed to, it has been remarkably effective. Unfortunately, it has been undercut for years by those who would gladly sacrifice rare species to boost short-term profits. In Congress, bills antagonistic to the act have been unveiled, like the Endangered Species Management Self-Determination Act, which if passed would require governors and Congress to sign off on all new endangered species listings and allow governors to take over management of species that reside solely in their states' borders. It would also automatically remove protected plants and animals from the list after five years."

Democratic Rep. John Dingell of Michigan added, "The Endangered Species Act enacted some of the first comprehensive guidelines to protect animals from extinction. Science is at its core, and should remain so. Sadly, political agendas threaten to undo that. From efforts to defund the agencies that oversee its implementation, to the forces that exploit loopholes in the law to put industry profits ahead of our planet, defending the [act] will require a diligence the likes of which we have not witnessed before."

Regarding how many Republicans and corporations seem to be viewing the matter, he concluded, "We cannot look at people on the other end of the boat and say, 'Your end of the boat is sinking.' All of us are in this boat, and we must lead the world in maintaining a vibrant, thriving, and healthy ecosystem."

Photo: Activists take part in a demonstration against the delisting of the gray wolf, arguing that it deserves the continued protection offered by the Endangered Species Act. DefendersBlog.org

U.S. drug war destroys rain forests

Fri, 21 Feb 2014 12:11:00 +0000

Rain forests around the world are rapidly disappearing due to illegal logging, the growth of palm oil plantations, the clearance for cattle ranching and other forms of commercial agriculture. Now scientists warn of another threat to the rain forests of Central America, especially those in Nicaragua, Guatemala, Honduras and some of their neighbors: the U.S. "war on drugs." This is according to a news report in Jan. 30 Science Daily, "Drug trafficking leads to deforestation in Central America."

It seems that the drug war in Mexico, fueled by the misguided anti-drug policies of the United States and the Mexican governments (in which both rely on military action and violence instead of legalization and reform) has driven the drug gangs deep into the remotest areas of the jungles of Central America, especially into supposedly protected regions where they are destroying large areas of the virgin forests to build airstrips, roads, and storage facilities to facilitate their drug activities.

They are also constructing "agribusinesses" in order to "launder their drug profits." It is almost impossible to believe that all this activity could be going on under the noses of the United States and its allies in the so-called war on drugs. Such blatant activity appears to be protected due to the graft and corruption of all the parties involved. This has been going on for years, according to Kendra McSweeney, a scientist at Ohio State University whose research, along with others, was the basis of the Science Daily report.

"In response to the crackdown in Mexico," she said, "drug traffickers began moving south into Central America around 2007 to find new routes through remote areas to move their drugs from South America and get them into the United States. When the drug traffickers moved in, they brought ecological devastation with them."

The indigenous Amerindian people, who live in the forests, suffer as a result of the arrival of the drug dealers who strip the forest for their roads and landing areas for planes. Drug money is used to bribe government officials to turn a blind eye to the drug dealers as well as the deforestation activities. Ranchers, illegal loggers and land speculators, according to the article, increase their activities, at the expense of the forest people. The influx of drug money and criminal enterprises stimulates the need to launder their ill-gotten profits with so-called legitimate businesses.

"Drug policies," McSweeney said, "are conservation policies, whether we realize it or not."

Besides the death and destruction to people, innocent and guilty alike, brought about by U.S. policies, the damage and destruction of the rain forests is a major ecological problem. "U.S. led militarized interdiction," McSweeney concluded, drove traffickers "to operate in ever-more remote, biodiverse ecosystems. Reforming drug policies could alleviate some of the pressures on Central America's disappearing forests."

For the reasons revealed in this news article it is ever more important that the failed and useless U.S. war on drugs, which has become a war on people and nature, be curtailed and ended; that rational policies be adopted to deal with the problems of addiction and the social conditions responsible for it.

Photo: The highest regions of Mombacho Volcano, near the city of Granada, Nicaragua, is home to a cloud forest and dwarf forest, which contains flora and fauna that are unique to the volcano (Keith/Wikimedia).

West Virginia hit by another chemical spill

Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:38:00 +0000

Even as the state of West Virginia is still reeling from its massive Jan. 9 chemical spill, it now has to contend with another. About 108,000 gallons of waste from a coal processing facility leaked into a tributary of the Kanawha River on Feb. 11, polluting 6 miles of Fields Creek. The waste includes all manner of toxic chemicals and metals, and is another blow to the people of the state as they attempt to piece their lives and health back together after the first disaster.

West Virginia American Water, the company that manages the Kanawha Valley Water Treatment Plant, stated that the latest leak would not affect the water supply further. But that remains to be seen. Emergency and environmental officials and investigators are calling the spill a "significant" one, despite assurances to the contrary by the companies involved. And a small amount of the waste that poisoned Fields Creek made it into the Kanawha River itself.

The facility from which the waste leaked is owned by none other than Patriot Coal, the company spun off of Peabody Energy and Arch Coal - the country's biggest coal corporations - to rob union members of their pensions and health benefits. Patriot Coal has also been responsible for mountaintop removal, an environmentally destructive process of retrieving coal, though it ceased those types of operations in 2012.

"This has had a significant, adverse environmental impact to Fields Creek and an unknown amount of impact to the Kanawha River," said Secretary Randy Huffman of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. "This is a big deal, this is a significant spill. When this much coal slurry goes into the stream, it wipes the stream out." Moreover, added Huffman, Patriot Coal did not do its job: The spill occurred - and was detected - when a valve broke sometime between 2:30 and 5:30 a.m., but Patriot did not call the DEP to alert them of the accident until 7:40 a.m. Companies are required by law to immediately report any spills to the department.

The Patriot facility also had a faulty alarm installed. It was supposed to immediately alert someone if a valve broke, but it failed to do so, so pumps continued to send the chemicals through the system. The toxic slurry was pushed on and on, until it broke the outer containment area that surrounded the busted valve, causing it to get into Fields Creek. "Had the alarms gone off and warned the operator," said Huffman, "the shutdown could have been done in time for the secondary containment area to contain the material that leaked."

It would seem that Patriot has exhibited the same lack of oversight and inspection that Freedom Industries did in the case of the earlier - and far more disastrous - chemical spill. The fallout from that incident continues to plague the impoverished state. Though West Virginia American Water and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have begun to allow residents of Charleston to begin using their water once more, many remain concerned that there is still a significant health risk present. Officials have carefully sidestepped calling the water safe as of yet.

Dr. Letitia Tearney, of the West Virginia Bureau of Public Health, said on Feb. 11, "You know, I believe the water, based on the standards we have, is usable for every purpose. But everybody has a different definition of safe."

Some residents continue to smell a foul, licorice-like odor coming from their water. In order to determine the cause of that, and to learn whether the water is truly safe at this point, state Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin says he is planning to commit $650,000 to an independent study on household water supplies called the West Virginia Testing Assessment Project.

As for the latest incident, Patriot will have to pay a fine for the leak. Huffman noted that much more ought to be done. "We have to do more than that. We can't just send them a bill and say, 'You have to pay this to continue operating.' There have to be fundamental changes made at such a facility. Maybe there needs to be a top-down review of all their processes. Maybe there needs to be a cultural change within that company that needs to take place that has more of an emphasis on safety, environmental controls, things like that."

Photo: Fields Creek, its water blackened with coal slurry. AP

Weathering the floods in England

Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:11:00 +0000

LONDON - At long last the army has arrived on the Somerset Levels (a coastal area in South West England) where floodwaters have been disrupting normal life since just after Christmas.

The army is using amphibious vehicles to deliver sandbags, fuel, food, and water to villages like Mucheleny and Thorney that have been cut off for weeks with access only by small boat.

The army is also transporting local people to check on long-flooded and deserted remote farms, villages and isolated dwellings.

Now the army vehicles will also give some reassurance to older residents who fear a medical emergency and the impossibility of getting a doctor or to hospital.

Local residents are, of course, delighted with the arrival of the troops.

But they are angry with just how long it has taken for Prime Minister David Cameron, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Environment Minister Owen Paterson to pay any attention to the month-old floods.

Patterson finally showed himself in the Levels last Monday, just after the delivery of some shiny new pumps. The pumps made a good background to the TV shots.

The visit was also just after the local Tory-controlled Somerset County Council embarrassed the Conservative/Liberal Democrat government by declaring the floods a "major incident" and a state of emergency.

On his visit the minister was visibly shocked by the anger from locals against the government's lack of assistance, or indeed interest.

Paterson and Cameron hurriedly promised help from the army and some dredging of the rivers Parrett and Tone, but have made no suggestions as to where the £4 million [$6.7 million] cost of such dredging might come from.

Nor have they said anything about the planned cuts to the Environment Agency announced just as the floods started.

On January 3, as some of the worst floods for 20 years hit the Somerset Levels, Paterson announced that 1,500 more jobs, many of them flood-related, would be cut at the agency.

Why have we had so much flooding?

Well, Henley on Thames Ukip councillor Davis Silvester, a defector from the Tory Party, has a simple explanation.

He has said gay marriage is to blame. God sent the rain to punish us.

Just as silly are the likes of Jeremy Clarkson and others who deny climate change, or the group who are claiming it is all God's great plan and are raising funds to build a new ark.

Such theories may not convince, but it's true that one obvious reason for floods is that we have had so much rain.

In much of England this January's rainfall has been the highest for a century, over twice the monthly average.

Add to that new patterns of rainfall, the result of climate change, that have seen heavy storms delivering as much as two inches (50mm) of rain in an hour.

The last natural phenomena is the number of strong winds and tidal conditions that have caused coastal flooding of low-lying coastal regions and backed up rivers.

Much more important is the way we have let greed and the relentless grasping for profit change the landscape we live in.

Intensive farming and land use has resulted in a dramatic decrease in floodplains near rivers. The increase of farmland drainage, paid for by government subsidies, means rain is no longer absorbed into the ground but speedily drains straight into the rivers.

The building of flood defences doesn't always help - they can sometimes simply move any flooding downstream.

Another factor is the growing body of property developers who can't see a patch of greenbelt or other green-field site without the desire to build a housing estate, car-park, retail shops or warehouse sheds.

They also play a key and disastrous part in the floods.

Many of these developments have been built directly on existing floodplains, prompting demand for these areas too to be defended from inevitable flooding - a vicious circle.

All these building developments have hard surfaces which shed rain into the elaborate, and expensive, network of drains that run directly into rivers and water-courses.

Loss of forests has played its part too. Hill farmers have been paid to rip out woodlands high in the mountains.

Those trees once absorbed rain.

Now it gushes down the bare mountainsides leading to the flooding we have seen along the lower reaches of rivers like the Severn.

The Environment Agency grades the risk of flooding in categories such as "a one in a 100 years" risk. The problem is that such floods have actually arrived three times in the last 10 years.

The village of Mucheleny, for instance, was cut off by floods for many weeks at the same time last year.

Floods on Britain's east coast and in our eastern counties are often reflected in similar events in the Netherlands on the other side of the North Sea.

That was certainly the case in the terrible events of 1953.

Nor should we forget that it was Dutch engineers like Cornelius Vermuyden who in 1650 started a project to drain the English fens.

Vermuyden's works for Oliver Cromwell and the Duke of Bedford involved dredging and straightening rivers, cutting new drains and building washes.

Washes were huge, low-lying areas that could be flooded deliberately to protect more vulnerable areas downstream.

Four centuries on, Vermuyden's Ouse Washes still flood every winter in a controlled way and are slowly emptied into the eastern rivers that flow into the Wash.

Today in Holland at national parks like the Biesbosch near Dortrecht the Dutch are using similar techniques.

They have stopped intensive farming on floodplains of the Rhine and created giant natural wetlands which soak up floodwater like a vast sponge or allow it to flood low-lying wild marsh without damage or threat to life or buildings.

Much of the control and mantainence of these wetlands and rivers is being done naturally using wild horses or ponies and by reintroducing beavers.

Beavers can and do dramatically change the landscape.

The beavers create and maintain ponds and wetlands that increase biodiversity, purify water and prevent large-scale flooding.

More than 20 countries have already reintroduced beavers. Their dams improve water quality, produce new habitats for fish and help reduce flooding downstream.

Reposted from Morning Star.

Photo: A car stands in the floodwater at Burrowbridge, southwestern England, Feb. 9. Tim Ireland/AP

We are West Virginia

Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:45:00 +0000

Most People's World readers live in the U.S. It's a simple, yet eloquent, phrase: United States of America. This sacred pact allows each state to manage much of its resources as it sees fit, and to pass laws or not pass laws according to that same ideal. New Hampshire isn't New Mexico, so one size doesn't fit all.

Bubbling under big media's obsession over recent weeks with New Jersey's political potboiler has been another story, that of West Virginia's ongoing water debacle. It's a mess. An ongoing pollution of the waterways has wrecked havoc on people trying to take care of their families.

On paper, West Virginia is a poor state. It's not, actually. Millions, if not billions, of dollars of minerals have been extracted from the state, and more remains. Just on the value of minerals and labor alone, you'd be hard pressed to call West Virginia a beggar state.

West Virginia is wealthy, if you consider its resources and the tireless work ethic of its people. However, political leaders of both parties and favored corporations have long chosen profits over infrastructure and selfish aims over public good.

The state government devoted little funds and less interest to managing properly the state's water supply. Judeo-Christian teachings preach good stewardship of the land, but this spiritual doctrine, common to many faiths, isn't one that resonates in corporate boardrooms, where they often focus on the financial bottom line.

That's West Virginia's sad, frustrating tale. A few state capitol insiders and their business cronies game the system, as always, choosing Caesar's coin over faith, and personal gain over public good. Ordinary people pay the price, as always.

Yet, is it that different in your home state?

In California, a deadly drought threatens to destroy harvests and the people whose livelihood depends on a steady stream of water. The decisions made to deal with this problem require the input of those affected by the drought, which is everyone, since Californians help feed the nation.

Over in North Carolina, a coal ash spill contaminated drinking water even as state officials wobbled before informing the public. In Texas, the booming petroleum gas industry gulps down water in arid parts of the state even though affected towns face threats to their long-term survival.

Wherever you live in the USA, the public-private balance on managing natural resources favors the latter. Even so, in any state, its residents aren't without means to improve their situation. Whatever they do, however, comes with a price. That price is losing your sense of isolation. It's a natural impulse to favor go-it-alone anarchist and libertarian dreams, but, given how well funded the corporate-mainstream political team is, this amounts to giving up the battle before you enter the field.

It's a romantic notion: David beats Goliath, one on one. In truth, David loses to Goliath if the giant brings his army with him. When an anti-public decision is made between a political backroom and a corporate boardroom, it's backed by Goliath and his army, every time.

Organizations exist that seek to champion the interests of poor, working- and middle- class people. Whether it's labor unions, the Environmental Defense Fund, or many other groups, thanks to the Internet (and public libraries that give media-poor citizens access to the 'Net), you have the means to make your voice heard.

The United States of America is a beautiful phrase. Are we united? Because, if we are, then the catastrophe in West Virginia matters to us, wherever we live. It sends a message: take care of our own backyards. In our home states, we know that West Virginia's troubles can only be averted by paying attention to the politics that affect our natural resources.

We know what works because we've seen over and over again how an organized group of people can win against incredible odds. Those of you who work a forty-hour week reap the benefits of strikers and their supporters who fought and died to make that happen. That struggle continues, yet it's not only about workers in fast-food restaurants. It's about basic, hardcore needs that affect all our lives.

The water you drink, the air you breathe, the food you eat, the products you use-you live in one state. You rely on many. You can't get by without the food, resources, and people of every part in this union.

As a nation, we are weakened when any of our states falter. Soul-deep, we are West Virginia.

Photo: View of earth from space. NASA.

Toward cyborg socialism

Mon, 10 Feb 2014 12:50:00 +0000

The first Earth Day was April 22, 1970. It was also Lenin's hundredth birthday. The coincidence was not intentional.

In fact, part of the point of Earth Day was to distance the nascent environmentalist movement from New Left critiques of consumer society, suburban development, and nuclear waste. In an attempt to avoid charges of "watermelon" politics - green on the outside, red on the inside - the message of the early environmental movement, as one Greenpeace slogan explicitly stated, was "I'm not a Red, I'm a Green." As environmentalism went mainstream, green nonprofits grew rich and powerful on corporate donations and adopted conciliatory strategies aimed at greening the world one brand name at a time.

These days, environmentalism can rival the Left's big-tent eclecticism: rugged wilderness fantasies, New Age mysticism, and middle-class romanticism exist side-by-side with indigenous anti-nuclear protests, campaigns against urban smog, back-to-the-land agrarian nostalgia, and entrepreneurial green tech. But lately, militant environmentalism is staging a comeback - as are state crackdowns. And even the most mainstream varieties of environmentalism are inching leftward. Climate change in particular has radicalizing potential, as more and more people are beginning to question the prevailing economic system's destructive effect on the environment. But mainstream environmental groups aren't going to offer a coherent critique of capitalism's ecological consequences or do the work of theorizing alternatives.

It's ridiculous that we still bracket climate change and water supplies as specifically "environmental" issues: the questions at hand are ones of political economy and collective action. That is to say, they are things the Left has plenty to say about. But while leftists are increasingly recognizing the importance of issues once compartmentalized as "environmental," left perspectives on those issues remain undertheorized and too rarely discussed. That needs to change - we can't just keep trotting out Naomi Klein whenever the topic comes up.

The Left needs more voices and sharper critiques that put our analysis of power and justice at the center of environmental discussions, where they should be. We can start by supporting and amplifying the work of environmental justice advocates who have long fought the uneven effects of environmental destruction on working communities - particularly working class people of color and the indigenous - and other marginalized groups. But there's more to do.

Environmental leftism tends to have an anarchist bent: anti-globalization protesters, direct-action-oriented Earth First! activists, animal-rights liberationists, and bike collectives. And because environmental problems are so place-specific, they often prompt solutions in the form of small-scale local action. Yet climate change and other global environmental challenges are systemic issues that require more than just pockets of alternative practice.

Still, if eco-anarchism doesn't tend to scale well, sweeping critiques of the "it's capitalism, stupid" variety aren't very helpful when it comes to the specifics of what exactly to do about it. Socialists, too, often evade questions of how to achieve worldwide economic justice without relying on existing forms of energy production or exacerbating environmental destruction. Even leaving aside the inevitable retort that the Soviet Union was hardly an ecology paradise, old socialist dreams of maximizing production in the pursuit of abundance and equality seem increasingly untenable. What will replace them?

It's not that we need to come up with a series of five-year plans for the environment. The exigencies of the climate crisis mean that we're not going to get the chance to build an ecotopia from scratch. Our situation requires a struggle for non-reformist reforms - projects that buy time and allow societies to adapt to climate change and meet immediate needs, while also setting us on the path to more fundamental transformations. Without a vision and a set of concrete ideas for how to get there, we're liable to end up with the the kind of bright-green centrism that favors both bike lanes and budget cuts, solar-powered drones and microgrid-powered jails - that is, something reminiscent of Germany's Green Party, a once inspiring effort now described by a disillusioned co-founder as "neoliberals on bikes." We've already got plenty of those.

And forget socialism in one country - ecosocialism in one country is even less feasible. The fact that ecological problems don't respect national or institutional borders is often used as an excuse for inaction, leading to the chronic breakdown of global climate negotiations. But that interdependence should be an impetus to reinvigorate the international left - a reminder that sustainability will come only through global solidarity.

At the same time, the consequences of environmental struggles within the US are vital in light of continued American hegemony - not to mention our status as one of the world's leading polluters. The US has not only consistently failed to commit to international treaties and emissions targets; it has also pushed to replace the more stringent responsibilities and substantial funding proposed by developing countries with market mechanisms preferred by business interests and financiers, who see opportunities for cost savings and accumulation in carbon offsets and trading - often with the support of US-based NGOs that have conceded the terms of the debate.

The failure of the American left to engage more substantially on environmental issues at home has real consequences for the expansion of neoliberalism worldwide.

The history of environmentalism is littered with Malthusianism, ecological determinism, biological essentialism, and neocolonial conservationism. Left skepticism of - or perhaps more accurately, indifference to - engagement with ecological politics is certainly understandable. But we're not talking about preserving an idealized concept of pristine, untouched nature - we're talking about the world we choose to make, and the world we'll have to live in.

Green dominates the environmental landscape, from the light greenwash of "sustainable lifestyles" to the dark green of deep ecologists. But environmentalism is also black lung disease in coal-mining towns and toxic brownfields in urban neighborhoods, the iridescent sheen of an oil spill and the translucent white of melting polar ice caps.

And so I cringe a bit at the term ecosocialism - it's too earth-toned. What we need is a cyborg socialism that points not to the primacy of ecology, but to the integration of natural and social, organic and industrial, ecological and technological; that recognizes human transformations of the natural world without simply asserting domination over it.

The Left doesn't need to go green - to save the planet and the people on it, it needs to go red.

Alyssa Battistoni is an editor at Jacobin magazine. Her work has appeared in Salon and Mother Jones, among other venues. This article is reposted with permission from Jacobin.

Photo: Jacob Anikulapo CC 2.0

Major Duke Energy ash spill turns Dan River gray

Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:35:00 +0000

DANVILLE, Va. - The Dan River, which flows through parts of North Carolina and Virginia until it reaches the Atlantic Ocean, has turned gray.

The reason wasn't heavy rains or wintry weather. Up to 100,000 tons of coal ash and 30 millions gallons of water were released from a pond at a retired Duke Energy plant in Eden, N.C. It happened when a 48-inch pipe from the 27-acre ash pond broke Sunday afternoon, Feb. 2. The polluted ash and water continued to pour into the Dan River as of Tuesday.

Duke Energy and local officials assure residents that the water is fine. End of subject.

But the crisis isn't over. In a prepared statement Duke Power indicated it has a long road to travel before the damage is stopped.

"We had some temporary solutions that have intermittently worked at times during the day, but we are still working on a short-term solution and a long-term repair," said Duke Energy spokesman Erin Culbert.

Environmental organizations which have filed a lawsuit to force Duke and other utilities to remove ash stored near waterways quickly point to the company's lapse in notifying the public. Sound like West Virginia?

The first public notification came at 4:03 p.m. Monday. North Carolina last year sued Duke over these ash ponds. The Eden plant closed two years ago and is about one hour from Raleigh. N.C.

North Carolina environmental agencies contacted communities which use water from the river. The first community is here in Danville, Va. Officials here report no problems with drinking water.

All water leaving Danville's water treatment facility has met public health standards, said Barry Dunkley, the city's water director. The pond is located 6 miles from Danville.

Coal ash can be toxic if there are high concentrations of metals. Results are as yet not known from water samples taken by the state and Duke Energy after the breach.

Duke officials say the pond's dam remains secure at this time. Erosion has been found on the side of the pond near the river. Engineers are working on firming up that part of the pond.

A 2012 report stated that the dam had significant hazard potential if the pond were breached.

Photo: Matt Wasson, director of Appalachian Voices, tests the water on the Dan River near Eden, N.C., on Monday, Feb. 3, 2014, after Sunday's Duke Energy ash spill. AP/Appalachian Voices

Bum rap for the Rapa Nui

Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:41:00 +0000

A new report shows that the Rapa Nuians, the native inhabitants of Easter Island (Rapa Nui), were not responsible for the collapse of their population and society due to over exploitation of natural resources and the destruction of the rain forest on their island. That erroneous view was popularized by Jared Diamond in his 2005 book titled "Collapse."

As Bruce Bower reports in the Jan. 25 issue of Science News, the anthropologist Maria Mulrooney has published the results of her studies of the Rapa Nui culture (Journal of Archeological Science, December 2013) based on new radiocarbon dates from archeological sites on the island. She has concluded that after the clear cutting of the forest in the 1500s, to make room for agricultural production, the population of Rapa Nui remained sufficiently vibrant to carry on food production and continue their cultural development.

Exactly when the Rapa Nui arrived on Easter Island is unknown but it was on or before 1200 A.D. or so. Mulrooney maintains they had a thriving culture which was still going strong even after their "discovery" by the Dutch explorer Jacob Roggeveen on Easter Sunday, 1722. This would indicate that they had not suffered" collapse" as a result of forest clearance.

Roggeveen reported that the island had about 2,000 to 3,000 inhabitants. He was also the first to report on the moai - the giant statues (erected as religious symbols as part of an ancestor cult) for which the island is famous. They were all in place and standing when he was visiting the island (for less than two weeks). In his short time there he managed to kill a dozen or so natives and so his estimate of the population may be incorrect as many people fled and hid out until after he left.

The Spanish showed up in 1770, claimed the island for King Carlos III, then sailed away. The moai were all standing and the people were still engaged in agriculture. When Captain Cook showed up in 1774, he noticed some of the moai had fallen but there was no sign of cultural "collapse."

Bower quotes Mulrooney as saying, "Deforestation did not equal societal failure on Rapi Nui. We should celebrate the remarkable achievements of this island civilization."

Yet the culture did end up destroyed. After Captain Cook's visit, Europeans visited more regularly in the 19th century. It has been suggested that Rapa Nui's decline may have been caused by the introduction of European diseases. By the early 1800s most of the moai had been toppled and the society had broken up into warring factions.

Peruvian slavers invaded in the 1860s and carried away 1,500 of the 2,000 or so Rapa Nuians into bondage in the mines of Peru. By 1878 only 111 natives were still living on the island. Some 97 percent of the cultural memory of the people had been lost after contact with the Europeans. The greatest loss may have been that of rongorongo, the native writing system of Rapa Nui and the only writing system created by any Polynesian group. All of those who knew the writing system died in the mines of Peru or from European-introduced tuberculosis which ravaged the survivors.

Chile annexed the island in 1888. The Rapa Nui were given citizenship in 1966 but they no longer rule on their island. Of the 6,000 or so people living on the island today about 3,600 are Rapa Nui. The archeologist Carl Lipo is quoted as saying, "The idea of societal collapse on Rapa Nui has long been assumed but there is no scientific basis for it." He is referring to a self-induced collapse. Their traditional culture was destroyed, and the people today are trying to reinvigorate it, but it is a bum rap to blame them for the loss of their own civilization.

Photo: Statues on Easter Island. Ian Sewell/Wikipedia (CC)