October, 13 2010, 12:12pm EDT
![Earthjustice](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012672/origin.jpg)
How Toxic are Oil Dispersants? Groups Press EPA to Find Out Before Next Spill
Shrimpers, community groups petition agency for info, clear rules before OK’ing future use
WASHINGTON
Gulf coast shrimpers and affected community groups from Alaska to
Louisiana to Florida pressed the federal government today to better
regulate dispersants -- the chemicals that oil companies routinely use
to break up oil slicks on water - before these chemicals are used in
future spill cleanups.
The non-profit environmental law firm Earthjustice filed a petition
(PDF) on behalf of the Louisiana Shrimp Association, Florida Wildlife
Federation, Gulf Restoration Network, the Alaska-based Cook Inletkeeper,
Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Waterkeeper and Sierra Club asking
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to write rules that would
set out exactly how and when dispersants could be used in the future.
The move comes just one day after the Obama administration announced it was lifting a moratorium on Gulf Coast oil drilling.
"Unprecedented use of toxic dispersants during the BP Deepwater Horizon
Disaster without prior scientific study and evaluation on the effect to
Gulf of Mexico marine ecosystems and human health was a horrific mistake
that should never have been allowed to happen," said Clint Guidry of
the Louisiana Shrimp Association. "Potential ecosystem collapse caused
by toxic dispersant use during this disaster will have immediate and
long term effects on the Gulf's traditional fishing communities'
ability to sustain our culture and heritage."
The groups are also calling on the EPA to require dispersant makers both
to disclose the ingredients of their products and to better test and
report the toxicity of those products.
"Industry executives would like us to think that dispersants are some
kind of fairy dust that magically removes oil from water," said
Earthjustice attorney Marianne Engelman Lado. "The fact is we have very
little idea how toxic dispersants are, what quantities are safe to use
or their long term effects on everything from people who work with the
chemicals to coral in the water. We have little information about their
long-term impact on life in the Gulf, or even whether the mix of oil and
dispersants is more harmful than oil alone."
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson herself has raised concerns about this
lack of information, calling for more data and better testing of
dispersants so that officials don't have to make "judgment calls on the
spot."
"We need to make sure that we understand the full effects of dispersants
on the environment and human health," said Florida Wildlife Federation
President Manley Fuller. "And when dispersants are used, we need to be
sure they are as safe as possible."
The groups' petition comes on the heels of a draft report issued last
week by the federal Oil Spill Commission that acknowledged that federal
agencies were unprepared for the tough decisions they faced over whether
to allow some 1.84 million gallons of chemical dispersants to be dumped
in the Gulf of Mexico during the record-breaking BP Deepwater Horizon
spill. The requested rules would ensure the agency never again be forced
to make such decisions without sufficient information and guidelines.
"Never again should the oil industry be allowed to dump hundreds of
thousands of gallons of dispersant into the sea as their preferred
method of response to an oil spill," said Cynthia Sarthou, of the Gulf
Restoration Network. "Because so little is currently known by EPA -- or
anyone else for that matter -- about the long-term impact to fish and
wildlife, the use of dispersants is a dangerous and potentially
devastating experiment."
The summer's catastrophe in the Gulf is not the first time the use of
chemical dispersants has come under fire. Workers involved in the
cleanup of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska reported health problems --
including blood in their urine and kidney and liver disorders --
believed to have been linked to dispersant exposure.
"In Alaska, we have witnessed the long-term adverse health consequences
of the use of dispersants on the health of cleanup workers," said Pamela
Miller, Executive Director of Alaska Community Action on Toxics. "The
indiscriminate use of toxic dispersants also threatens the health of
subsistence and commercial fisheries that are essential to the culture
and economy of Alaska."
"Oil corporations in Alaska now reach for dispersants as one of their
first tools for oil spill response," said Cook Inletkeeper Bob
Shavelson. "Countless Alaskans rely on our wild, healthy fisheries, and
we have a right to know about the toxic dispersants used in our
waters."
The group also filed a 60-day-notice of intent to file a lawsuit (PDF)
prodding the agency to provide information long required by the Clean
Water Act identifying exactly where dispersants may be used and how much
is safe.
"The largely unregulated use of dispersants is another example in the
all-too-long list of ways that oil, coal and gas industries act with an
open distain for environmental and human health," stated Scott Edwards,
Director of Advocacy for Waterkeeper Alliance. "Coal companies dumping
mine waste in our streams, gas extractors injecting harmful chemicals in
our drinking water and the oil industry poisoning our coastal
communities first with oil and now with untested dispersants all point
to one thing - it's time to end our irresponsible addiction to harmful
fossil fuels and move onto cleaner, renewable energy sources."
The Clean Water Act requirements have been in place for decades, but
administration after administration has failed to comply with the law,
and there was scant data available to EPA officials when they were
confronted with the devastating Gulf Coast spill this summer.
"The BP oil disaster painfully showed just how little is known about
these chemicals. We should not be gambling with the health of our
coastal waters or the people who make their life from them. If
dispersants are going to be part of the toolbox for responding to future
emergencies, we need to be certain they're not doing more harm than
good. We call on EPA to pledge that never again will oil spill response
turn into an uncontrolled experiment in our nation's waters," said
Sierra Club Louisiana Representative Jill Mastrototaro.
###
Background Material:
To see the petition filed pressing EPA to establish new rules requiring
dispersant manufacturers to reveal the toxicity and ingredients of their
projects see: https://www.earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/dispersant-petition
To see the 60-day notice of intent to sue over long required Clean Water Act requirements, please visit: https://www.earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/dispersant-notice
To view the federal Oil Spill Commission report, please visit: https://www.oilspillcommission.gov/document/use-surface-and-subsea-dispersants-during-bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill---
CONTACT:
Marianne Engelman Lado, Earthjustice, (212) 791-1881, ext. 228, (917)
Clint Guidry, Louisiana Shrimp Association, (504) 952-4368
Cynthia Sarthou, Gulf Restoration Network, (504) 525-1528 ext 202, cyn@healthygulf.org
Manley Fuller, Florida Wildlife Federation, wildfed@gmail.com
Bob Shavelson, Cook Inletkeeper, (907) 235-4068, ext. 22, 907.299.3277 (cell) bob@inletkeeper.org
Pamela K. Miller, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, pkmiller@akaction.net
Scott Edwards, Waterkeeper, (914) 674-0622, ext. 13, sedwards@waterkeeper.org
Kristina Johnson, Sierra Club (415) 977-5619 kristina.johnson@sierraclub.org
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
'Tragic Outcome' for Gig Workers as California Supreme Court Hands Win to Uber, DoorDash
"Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers," the case plaintiff said.
Jul 25, 2024
Labor advocates on Thursday decried a ruling by the California Supreme Court upholding a lower court's affirmation of a state ballot measure allowing app-based ride and delivery companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors, limiting their worker rights.
The court's seven justices ruled unanimously in Castellanos v. State of California that Proposition 22, which was approved by 58% of California voters in 2020, complies with the state constitution. Prop 22—which was overturned in 2021 by an Alameda County Superior Court judge in 2021—was upheld in March 2023 by the state's 1st District Court of Appeals.
The business models of app-based companies including DoorDash, Instacart, Lyft, and Uber rely upon minimizing frontline worker compensation by categorizing drivers as independent contractors instead of employees. Independent contractors are not entitled to unemployment insurance, health insurance, or compensation for business expenses.
There are approximately 1.4 million app-based gig workers in California, according to industry estimates.
While DoorDash hailed Thursday's ruling as "not only a victory for Dashers, but also for democracy itself," gig worker advocates condemned the decision.
"Over the last three years, gig workers across California have experienced firsthand that Prop 22 is nothing more than a bait-and-switch meant to enrich global corporations at the expense of the Black, brown, and immigrant workers who power their earnings," plaintiff Hector Castellanos, who drives for Uber and Lyft, said in a statement.
"Prop 22 has allowed gig companies like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash to deprive us of a living wage, access to workers compensation, paid sick leave, and meaningful healthcare coverage," Castellanos added. "Today's ruling only strengthens our demand for the right to join together in a union so that we can begin improving the gig economy for workers and our customers."
Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, AFL-CIO, said that "we are deeply disappointed that the state Supreme Court has allowed tech corporations to buy their way out of basic labor laws despite Proposition 22's inconsistencies with our state constitution."
"These companies have upended our social contract, forcing workers and the public to take on the inherent risk created by this work, while they profit," she continued. "A.B. 5 granted virtually all California workers the right to be paid for all hours worked, health and safety standards, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, and the right to organize."
"Rideshare and delivery drivers deserve those rights as well," Gonzalez stressed.
The Gig Workers Rising campaign said on social media that "Uber and other app corporations spent $220 million to buy this law, and they did it by tricking Californians."
Prop 22's passage in November 2020 with nearly 59% of the vote was the culmination of what was by far the most expensive ballot measure in California history. App-based companies and their backers outspent labor and progressive groups by more than 10 to 1, with proponents pouring a staggering $204.5 million into the "yes" campaign's coffers against just $19 million for the "no" side.
"Voters were told the initiative would provide us with 'historic new benefits' and guaranteed earnings," said Gig Workers Rising. "But since it went into effect, drivers have seen our pay go down, learned the benefits are a sham, and have to accept unsafe rides because of the constant threat of being 'deactivated,' kicked off the app with little explanation or warning."
"If Uber really cared about good benefits and fair wages, it could make that happen tomorrow," the campaign added. "Instead, it has shown it would rather slash pay, bamboozle voters, and put drivers' lives and livelihoods in danger—all while promising $7 billion in stock buybacks to banks and billionaires."
Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine who focuses on labor and inequality, toldCalMatters that Thursday's ruling was "a really tragic outcome," but "it's not the end of the road."
Dubal's sentiment was echoed by some California state legislators, who said the ruling presents an opportunity to act.
"While this decision is frustrating, it must also be motivating," said state Senate Labor Committee Chair Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-28). "I'm more determined than ever to ensure that all workers—including our diverse and Black, Indigenous, and people of color-led gig workforce—have the basic protections of workers compensation, paid sick leave, family leave, disability insurance, and the right to form a union."
Prop 22 has served as a template for lawmakers in other states seeking to deny or limit basic worker rights, benefits, and protections.
In Massachusetts, app-based companies have been fighting for years to get a measure to classify drivers as contractors on the state ballot. In 2022, Lyft made the largest political donation in state history—$14.4 million—to a coalition funding one such proposal.
Last month, Uber and Lyft reached an agreement with the office of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, a Democrat, to pay $175 million to settle a lawsuit filed in 2020. As part of the deal, the companies also agreed to increase driver pay and provide paid sick leave, accident insurance, and some health benefits. The agreement does not address how app-based gig workers should be classified.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Young Voters Tell Kamala Harris to 'Fight for Our Future'
"This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Jul 25, 2024
Four youth-led groups on Thursday urged Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, to "fight for our future" by pursuing a policy agenda the coalition unveiled in a March letter to U.S. President Joe Biden.
It's been less than a week since Biden left the race and endorsed Harris, who is expected to face former Republican Donald Trump and his running mate, U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), in the November election. Since then, she's racked up endorsements from Democratic members of Congress and progressive groups focused on issues including climate, labor, and reproductive rights.
March for Our Lives, which was launched after the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, honored Harris with the group's first-ever endorsement on Wednesday, calling her "the right person to stand up for us and fight for the country we deserve."
"To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters."
The gun violence prevention organization is part of the youth-led coalition behind the new letter, which also includes the climate-focused Sunrise Movement; Gen-Z for Change, which advocates on a range of issues; and the national immigrant network United We Dream Action.
"You have an urgent and important task. To defeat Trump, you must rebuild support and enthusiasm among young voters," the coalition told Harris on Thursday, noting that she sought the Democratic nomination during the last cycle. "You should build on your 2020 campaign platform where you put forward a strong vision to make the economy work for everyday people and ensure a livable future for us all."
The groups urged Harris to support the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and the Reverse Mass Incarceration Act. They pushed her to expand pathways to citizenship, keep families together, end fossil fuel subsidies, and create good, union jobs. They also called on her to prioritize gun violence prevention and investments in public health solutions and green, affordable housing.
"Democrats are at a critical crossroads with young people," the coalition wrote to Harris on Thursday. "Polls showed Biden and Trump neck-and-neck among young voters."
ANew York Times/Siena College poll conducted July 22-24 shows Trump leading Harris 48% to 47% among likely voters and 48% to 46% among registered voters—differences that fall within the margin of error.
Forbesnoted Thursday that "Democrats are far more enthusiastic about Harris than they were Biden, the Times/Siena survey found, with nearly 80% of voters who lean Democrat saying they would like Harris to be the nominee, compared to 48% of Democrats who said the same about Biden three weeks ago."
The outlet also pointed to two other polls conducted by Morning Consult and Reuters/Ipsos since Biden dropped out, which both show Harris with a narrow lead over Trump.
"You have an opportunity to win the youth vote by turning the page and differentiating yourself from Biden policies that are deeply unpopular with us, such as approving new oil and gas projects, denying people their right to seek refuge and asylum, and funding the Israeli government's killing of civilians in Gaza," the youth coalition highlighted Thursday. "You must speak to the economic pain young people are facing from crushing student debt and skyrocketing housing and food prices."
Looking beyond November, the groups told Harris—who could be the first Black woman and person of Asian descent elected to the country's highest office—that "you could be a historic president. Not just because of who you are, but what you can accomplish."
"Young people are energized and ready to organize against fascism and for the future we deserve," they concluded. "This is your chance to energize young people and our communities to vote, mount one of the greatest political comebacks in decades, and deliver a resounding defeat to the far-right agenda of Trump and Vance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Video Game Actors Strike for AI Protections
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said one union leader. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games."
Jul 25, 2024
After nearly two years of negotiations with video game giants and no deal that would protect performers from artificial intelligence, unionized voice and motion capture actors who work in video game development announced Thursday that they will go on strike starting at 12:01 am on Friday, July 26.
The performers are represented by Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), which last year won a contract for TV and film actors that included "unprecedented provisions for consent and compensation that will protect members from the threat of AI," after the union went on strike for four months.
The union has been negotiating on behalf of video game actors with major production companies including Disney Character Voices Inc., Activision Productions Inc., and WB Games Inc., and has won concessions over wages and job safety—but "AI protections remain the sticking point," said SAG-AFTRA on Thursday as the impending strike was announced.
Unionized actors want protections that would stop video game companies from training AI to replicate actors' voices or likeness without their consent and without compensating them.
"The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually," said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator for SAG-AFTRA. "The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games. That includes the SAG-AFTRA members who bring memorable and beloved game characters to life, and they deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the AI use of their faces, voices, and bodies."
"Frankly, it's stunning that these video game studios haven't learned anything from the lessons of last year—that our members can and will stand up and demand fair and equitable treatment with respect to AI, and the public supports us in that," he added.
Sarah Elmaleh, negotiating committee chair for the union's interactive media agreement, said the negotiations have shown the companies "are not interested in fair, reasonable AI protections, but rather flagrant exploitation."
"We look forward to collaborating with teams on our interim and independent contracts, which provide AI transparency, consent, and compensation to all performers, and to continuing to negotiate in good faith with this bargaining group when they are ready to join us in the world we all deserve," said Elmaleh.
The unionized actors voted in favor of the strike authorization with a 98.32% yes vote, said SAG-AFTRA.
The strike was announced as more than 500 workers who help develop the popular World of Warcraft video game franchise voted to join the Communications Workers of America (CWA), with the games publisher, Blizzard Entertainment, recognizing the bargaining unit.
CWA noted that the workers' journey to union representation began with a walkout in 2021 at Activision Blizzard, which was later bought by Microsoft, over sexual harassment and discrimination.
"What we've accomplished at World of Warcraft is just the beginning," Eric Lanham, a World of Warcraft test analyst, said in a statement. "We know that when workers have a protected voice, it's a win-win for employee standards, the studio, and World of Warcraft fans looking for the best gaming experience."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular