Solar Panels Are Starting to Die, Leaving Behind Toxic Trash

By J.D. Davidson | The Center Square

By 2050, the International Renewable Energy Agency projects that up to 78 million metric tons of solar panels will have reached the end of their life, and that the world will be generating about 6 million metric tons of new solar e-waste annually............To Read More....

 

Video: Alternative Energy is a Scam and an Expensive Failure

Viewpoint: Produce is sugary, GMO ‘poison’? Scientific American embraces long-debunked food safety tropes

Alex Berezow | August 22, 2019

The headline is not exaggeration or hyperbole. Scientific American just ran an article claiming that vegetables are becoming like sugary snacks and are toxic. And that’s not even the worst part.
The article was given the ridiculous headline “Broccoli Is Dying. Corn Is Toxic. Long Live Microbiomes!” It was co-authored by a marine biologist and a retired English teacher. As one might expect from the headline, the article makes one outrageous, unscientific claim after another.



The lies, distortions, and laugh-out-loud whoppers start early and often. Let’s dissect them:

As food writer Mark Bittman recently remarked, since food is defined as “a substance that provides nutrition and promotes growth” and poison is “a substance that promotes illness,” then “much of what is produced by industrial agriculture is, quite literally, not food but poison.”

This is the first sentence. Yes, that’s how this screed actually begins. Everything you eat is poison. How do we know? Because an organic food activist with no relevant scientific training or expertise says so..............To Read More.....

Related article:  How European-Based NGOs Block Crop Biotechnology Adoption In Africa, Margaret Karembu, Director of International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, Africa regional office (ISAAA) AfriCenter based in Nairobi | February 23, 2017

“Clean” energy isn’t so clean

By Ronald Stein, Mark Mathis March 31st, 2019 |Energy |7 Comments

Energy consumers everywhere, we need to clean up our act! Anti-fossil fuel activists are no doubt nodding their heads in agreement. Except, we’re thinking about something a little different than what they’re thinking. Let’s talk. What we’re referring to is the commonly over-used phrase, “clean energy.”

All of us, even those who understand that oil, natural gas, and coal run the world, often refer to wind and solar as “clean” without even questioning it. It’s time to do some questioning. What is it that makes wind and solar so clean and fossil fuels so dirty? Perception and hype. With wind and solar you don’t see anything getting burned (perception) like you do with oil, natural gas, and coal. And it’s the burning that creates pollution (hype). But let’s take a closer look at that.

Air pollution from the burning of fossil fuels in the United States has been in steep decline since 1970. And that dramatic drop across all six pollutants the EPA classifies as dangerous

took place at the same time Americans increased their fossil fuel use by 40 percent. From 1988 to 2015 our vehicle miles traveled have more than doubled! So, as America has grown, we’ve used more fossil energy, traveled a lot more and yet the air we breathe has continued to get cleaner. That’s amazing. Check “pollutants” off the list.

And, for those who are worried about energy-related CO2 emissions, they’ve also been in decline for more than a decade.............To Read More....

Keeping track of toxic exposure

January 28, 2019 By Michael D. Shaw @ HealthNewsDigest.com.
 Posted in Environmental Factors, Regulatory activities | Permalink | Comments (0)

It was William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, aka Lord Kelvin who said, “When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science.”

 

Few would argue with his contention, and these days we have in place countless measuring devices deployed in every conceivable environment. Ever since I was a student, it was understood that temperature was the most measured variable. But, one wonders…is that still true? How many millions of people frequently test their blood glucose; how many millions of websites measure their traffic every day?

In the world of public health, starting around 100 years ago, and then being energized by the creation of agencies such as EPA and OSHA, monitoring of exposure to air contaminants occurs now in virtually every country. In the US, OSHA promulgates Permissible Exposure Limits for more than 500 substances. Additional standards are published by other agencies and non-governmental organizations.

Per 29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2), these PELs–for the most part–are based on an 8-hour time-weighted average of the worker’s exposure to the substance. Thus, not only must the concentrations be measured, but the data must be archived and processed such that the appropriate average is calculated.

But here’s the problem. The PELs date back to the early days of OSHA, founded in 1971. Even then, measuring instruments did exist for some of the specified substances. And, virtually all of them were provided with an output that–in theory–could be captured by some sort of recording device.

Microcomputers were still a decade away. Expensive data loggers would be introduced in the early 1970s, but did not see widespread usage in the occupational health market.

As a consequence, before the advent of microprocessors, most 8-hour averages were based on wet chemical analytical methods, whereby an air sample is collected over a period of time, and this “single number” concentration–thus determined–became the average. However, no time history was available, and even though this average might be below the PEL, there may have been episodes of high exposure, that were literally averaged out. For many substances, in addition to the PEL, there are also limits on short-term exposure.

Before microcomputers, if an occupancy had continuous gas detection instruments installed, which provided instantaneous readings–along with user-adjustable alarms–OSHA did not press too hard on the 8-hour average matter. Besides, many companies also had wet chemical analysis reports on file for the analytes in question.

In 1984, Interscan introduced the DOS version of its Arc-Max^® package–one of the first data acquisition products intended to support PEL compliance. The first customers were in the healthcare field, mostly involving applications for monitoring ethylene oxide, a sterilant.
There have been many updates to Arc-Max since then, and it is still a popular product, providing data acquisition, archiving, and reporting to a long list of end-users.

For many years, software packages such as Arc-Max have traditionally been deployed on local or networked computers, with true Cloud data logging being the rare exception. The advantage of a Web-based program is that users can “watch their sensors on their phone,” or any other compatible device. While such packages exist, they are usually costly and proprietary, in that they are not easily open to any sensor.

Interscan is now alpha testing a Web-based package that will accommodate any sensor with a standard output, and will support most communications protocols. The beta testing will involve end-users in the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries. Sensor data is ported to a platform hosted at Amazon Web Services, with various levels of access available. Averaging and trending are calculated in the Cloud, with the report dashboard available at a Web portal.

More information on this new package will be released as available.

 

Keeping Track Of Toxic Exposure

January 28, 2019 By Michael D. Shaw @ HealthNewsDigest.com       

Environmental Factors, Regulatory activities | Permalink | Comments (0)      

 

It was William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, aka Lord Kelvin who said, “When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science.”
Few would argue with his contention, and these days we have in place countless measuring devices deployed in every conceivable environment. Ever since I was a student, it was understood that temperature was the most measured variable. But, one wonders…is that still true? How many millions of people frequently test their blood glucose; how many millions of websites measure their traffic every day?

In the world of public health, starting around 100 years ago, and then being energized by the creation of agencies such as EPA and OSHA, monitoring of exposure to air contaminants occurs now in virtually every country. In the US, OSHA promulgates Permissible Exposure Limits for more than 500 substances. Additional standards are published by other agencies and non-governmental organizations.

Per 29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2), these PELs–for the most part–are based on an 8-hour time-weighted average of the worker’s exposure to the substance. Thus, not only must the concentrations be measured, but the data must be archived and processed such that the appropriate average is calculated.

But here’s the problem. The PELs date back to the early days of OSHA, founded in 1971. Even then, measuring instruments did exist for some of the specified substances. And, virtually all of them were provided with an output that–in theory–could be captured by some sort of recording device. Microcomputers were still a decade away. Expensive data loggers would be introduced in the early 1970s, but did not see widespread usage in the occupational health market.

As a consequence, before the advent of microprocessors, most 8-hour averages were based on wet chemical analytical methods, whereby an air sample is collected over a period of time, and this “single number” concentration–thus determined–became the average. However, no time history was available, and even though this average might be below the PEL, there may have been episodes of high exposure, that were literally averaged out. For many substances, in addition to the PEL, there are also limits on short-term exposure.

Before microcomputers, if an occupancy had continuous gas detection instruments installed, which provided instantaneous readings–along with user-adjustable alarms–OSHA did not press too hard on the 8-hour average matter. Besides, many companies also had wet chemical analysis reports on file for the analytes in question.

In 1984, Interscan introduced the DOS version of its Arc-Max^® package–one of the first data acquisition products intended to support PEL compliance. The first customers were in the healthcare field, mostly involving applications for monitoring ethylene oxide, a sterilant.

There have been many updates to Arc-Max since then, and it is still a popular product, providing data acquisition, archiving, and reporting to a long list of end-users.

For many years, software packages such as Arc-Max have traditionally been deployed on local or networked computers, with true Cloud data logging being the rare exception. The advantage of a Web-based program is that users can “watch their sensors on their phone,” or any other compatible device. While such packages exist, they are usually costly and proprietary, in that they are not easily open to any sensor.

Interscan is now alpha testing a Web-based package that will accommodate any sensor with a standard output, and will support most communications protocols. The beta testing will involve end-users in the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries. Sensor data is ported to a platform hosted at Amazon Web Services, with various levels of access available. Averaging and trending are calculated in the Cloud, with the report dashboard available at a Web portal.
More information on this new package will be released as available.

                                       

 

Pesticides: Probably Less Scary Than You Imagine

What if much that you think you know about agriculture, farming and food isn't actually true? What if there are "myths" that have been intentionally and mostly unintentionally spread about these issues? What if the truth about these issues matters for the future of humanity? That is what this blog is about. If you are interested in learning more about my business as a public speaker, please visit my website, drstevesavage.com.

Contrary to campaigns by environmental groups and anti-GMO activists that talk about a “flood” of “toxic pesticides” unleashed since the beginning of the biotech era, the data show usage shifting dramatically away from Category II (moderately toxic) and Class III (slightly toxic) towards Category IV (practically non-toxic) and the almost complete abandonment of Class I (highly toxic) pesticides......From Steve Savage's Applied Mythology

Dear Mr. Savage,

 

 

The chemicals anxiety machine

Candidates, Civil Rights Commission and greens use phony health threats to scare voters

Paul Driessen

Rank politics and baseless health scares are driving anxiety, North Carolina election campaigns, civil rights claims and plans for class action lawsuits, all of which could bring electricity rate hikes that will cause real job, health and civil rights problems for families – for no health or environmental benefits.

As I noted in an earlier article, North Carolina state toxicologist Ken Rudo has publicly disagreed with the US Environmental Protection Agency and other NC “tox” experts, who say levels of chromium-6 detected in some NC waters are safe. The contaminant comes from coal ash deposits and other sources.

Not surprisingly, Erin Brockovich has sided with Dr. Rudo. She became rich and famous by promoting “toxic chromium” scares, co-authored a recent letter with the radical Environmental Working Group raising Cr-6 alarms, and will speak on election eve at Catawba College in NC to stir things up still further.

The issue is also playing prominently in the NC gubernatorial campaign. Democrat candidate Roy Cooper says well water is unsafe and is hammering the Duke Energy power company for creating the deposits and sitting Governor Pat McCrory (who once worked for Duke) for rescinding a “do not drink” order.

Not to be outdone, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) claims chromium-6 is seeping out of ash deposits, contaminating drinking water supplies and “disproportionately affecting” minority families. Communities near “waste disposal” and “industrial” facilities have “extremely high” rates of cancer, heart and other health issues, a Commission report asserts, lumping those facilities in with coal ash sites.

The contaminants get into well water, drinking water, and even “recreational waters” that are “heavily used for fishing, boating and swimming,” the Commission report states. The problem “extends for miles” around communities near coal ash deposits, which are “disproportionately located in low-income and minority communities,” making this a civil rights issue that government must address.

The USCCR wants the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and NC Department of Environmental Quality to examine the civil rights implications, classify coal ash as a “hazardous waste,” force utility companies to relocate deposits, and compensate people for healthcare expenses and land devaluations.

A persuasive and well-documented dissent by Commissioner Gail Heriot (pages 113-142 of the report) demolishes the USCCR assertions. Her analysis deserves widespread attention both on environmental and civil rights matters, and on how some people deliberately use these issues to generate racial animosity.

No one on the Commission, she notes, has any expertise in waste disposal, toxicology, epidemiology or medicine, and thus had no business issuing pronouncements on coal ash toxicity. There is “strong” evidence that coal ash facilities “are not disproportionately located” near racial minorities. Lumping coal ash together with other facilities that involve dangerous chemicals, and then blaming coal ash, is invalid.

Ms. Heriot is also perturbed that USCCR Chairman Martin Castro suggested that NC communities are bring “victimized by environmental racism.” These kinds of “incendiary allegations” are inappropriate, she says; they “fan the flames of racial resentment” based on insufficient or false information.

Interestingly, tests in 2014 consistently found Cr-6 in city water supplies above 0.07 parts per billion, unnecessarily triggering “do not drink” advisories to some well water users, the Greensboro News & Record reported. However, May 2016 tests could not even detect the chemical, the paper noted. 

The 0.07 ppb standard is equivalent to 7 seconds in 3,300 years. The EPA and NCDEQ safety standard for Cr-6 in drinking water is 100 ppb, and a 2012 scientific paper in the Journal of Applied Toxicology concluded that regularly drinking water with 210 ppb poses no health or cancer risks. That safe, non-carcinogenic 210 ppb level is 3,000 times higher than the 0.07 ppb “trigger warning” level.

There is no evidence that Cr-6 levels found in U.S. drinking water cause any of the laundry list of health problems presented by the USCCR. For the EWG to say barely detectable 0.02 ppb levels are dangerous and carcinogenic in water that 218 million Americans drink every day is disingenuous and incendiary. Moreover, coal ash is mostly inert, with most metallic components in tiny amounts and/or bonded tightly in crystalline (glassy) sand particles. Very little leaches out. Moreover, chromium-6 occurs naturally in rocks and soils throughout the USA. It is not solely a byproduct of coal burning or industrial processes.

Saying grave health concerns arise from such minimal Cr-6 levels as 0.02 or 0.07 ppb in drinking water is groundless; saying health impacts arise from its its presence in recreational waters is absurd. Indeed, Ohio’s EPA director dismisses the EWG claims as “scare tactics” to raise money.

All this suggests that the USCCR and EWG claims are just part of the campaign to eliminate coal-fired power plants and the reliable, affordable electricity they generate. The claims could also be setting the stage for more collusive sue-and-settle lawsuits between the USEPA and environmentalist groups – with those who will be most affected having no opportunity to testify and no voice in the outcome.

Forcing utility companies to spend billions relocating huge ash deposits to “lined, watertight landfills” (in someone else’s backyard) will bring no health or environmental benefits. But it will bankrupt companies, send electricity prices soaring, reverberate through our economy, and raise true civil rights issues. As Ms. Heriot notes, “driving up the cost of power has its own disparate impact” on minority families.

Black and Hispanic families spend a 10-50% greater share of their income than white families on heating, air conditioning, lights and other electrical costs, National Black Chamber of Commerce president Harry Alford points out. They are also more likely to suffer still lower living standards and even lose their jobs, as employers respond to higher electricity prices by laying more people off.

If rates nearly double from current costs in coal-reliant states like North Carolina and Virginia (9 cents per kilowatt-hour) to those in anti-coal New York (16 cents) or Connecticut (17 cents), poor families will have to pay $500-1,000 more annually for electricity. Hospitals, school districts, factories and businesses will have to spend additional thousands, tens of thousands or millions.

Where will that cash come from?

Will businesses have to lay off dozens or hundreds of employees, or close their doors? If they pass costs on to customers, where will families find that extra cash? If hospitals cut services or raise fees, how will that affect patient costs and care? Might the EWG and USCCR provide financial assistance?

Fat chance.

By necessity, hospitals are energy intensive. The average U.S. hospital uses 31 kilowatt-hours of electricity per square foot per year. For facilities like the 665,000-square-foot Inova Fairfax Women’s and Children’s Hospital in Northern Virginia, that translates into $1,855,000 per year at 9 cents/kWh, but $3,505,000 at 17 cents. That’s a $1.6-million difference.

Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center’s Comprehensive Cancer Center in Winston-Salem, NC is 530,600 square feet. That’s $1,480,000/year at 9 cents/kWh or $2,796,000/year at 17 cents: a $1.5-million gap.

Ohio State University’s James Cancer Center and Solove Research Institute in Columbus is1.1 million square feet. That’s $3,069,000/year at 9¢/kWh versus $5,797,000 at 17 cents: a $2.7 million shortfall!  

Those cost increases would result in lost jobs and reduced patient care. Now try to imagine the impacts on schools, factories, churches, grocery stores, malls and thousands of other major electricity users – to address health problems that exist only in the fertile minds of a few activists and regulators.

The war on coal, petroleum, nuclear and hydroelectric power is an eco-imperialist war on reliable, affordable electricity – and on poor and minority families. Policies that drive energy prices up drive people out of jobs, drive companies out of business, drive families into green energy poverty.

An yet these fundamental “civil rights” and “environmental justice” issues are rarely mentioned by the USCCR, EWG, EPA, NAACP, Democratic Party or self-appointed “civil rights leaders.” Too many of them also oppose charter schools for minority kids who are getting shortchanged by public schools, and regulatory reforms to spur job creation in minority communities. Will common sense ever prevail?

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death and other books on the environment.

Fatal Fungus Showing Up In Midwestern Pastures

July 17, 2013 By Georgina Gustin

A fungus that can kill horses and cattle is rampant in Missouri’s pastureland this summer — and has already felled at least four animals.  The fungus, called ergot, appears in grains and grasses when weather conditions are favorable, as they have been this year. The fungus is so widespread that state authorities are warning animal owners to be especially vigilant and to move animals to non-infected fields.

“It’s very severe this year, and I want producers to be on the lookout for it,” said Craig Roberts, a professor of plant science with the University of Missouri Extension and the state’s forage specialist. “I’ve seen it in every field and in every grass species.”……The toxins in ergot are chemically related to LSD and have been linked to deadly epidemics in the Middle Ages, when it was known as St. Anthony’s Fire. Some historians believe that the symptoms of ergotism in people — scratching, convulsions and hallucinations — were behind the “bewitchment” that triggered the Salem Witch Trials. The poisoning in humans is usually linked to infected rye, which was grown in abundance in that region….To ReadMore…..

My Take – I inserted this link because I wanted to highlight the Salem Witch Trial issue presented here.  I don’t know if any of that was true, but if so it demonstrates what ignorance and ideology can bring forth.  Today we suffer from persecution by greenie ignorance and ideology.  I’m just surprised some idiotic green group isn’t attempting to claim this is caused by pesticides, industrialization, capitalism….or worst of all…..conservatives.