MVCAC

mvcac@lists.osenergy.org

1014 discussions

Air Pollutants, PFAS Increase Coronavirus Deaths
by Duane Nichols 02 Jul '20

02 Jul '20

https://theintercept.com/2020/06/26/coronavirus-toxic-chemicals-pfas-bpa/?u… Scientists Pin Blame for Some Coronavirus Deaths on Air Pollution, PFAS, and Other Chemicals Sharon Lerner June 26 2020, 12:27 p.m. Almost six months into the coronavirus pandemic, it’s already clear that environmental pollution is responsible for some portion of the hundreds of thousands of Covid-19 deaths around the world. Now scientists are trying to pinpoint how exactly industrial chemicals make people more susceptible to the coronavirus and how much of the blame for the devastation wrought by the new coronavirus should be laid at the feet of the industry that produces those chemicals. The link between Covid-19 and air pollution is particularly strong. A study set to publish in July linked six air pollutants in 120 Chinese cities with cases of the viral disease. Researchers in Italy have also shown that long-term exposure to air pollution is “significantly correlated with cases of Covid-19” in up to 71 provinces in that country. And a study that used data from California, set to publish in Environmental Research in August, showed that the air pollutants PM2.5, PM 10, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide were associated with coronavirus infections. The authors of that study concluded that reducing exposure to these pollutants “will contribute to defeating COVID-19.” Scientists have even managed to measure the precise harm that a single microgram/cubic meter increase in air pollution has on a population, which, according to researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, is “an 8% increase in mortality from COVID-19.” While alarming, these findings aren’t surprising, according to Linda Birnbaum, the former director of the National Institutes for Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program, who stepped down last year. “Everything in our health is determined by our environment,” she said. In addition to air pollutants, Birnbaum pointed to the potential for endocrine-disrupting chemicals to make people more vulnerable to Covid-19. Among them are BPA and its replacements; phthalates, which are found in makeup, nail polish, and plastics, particularly food packaging; and PFAS, a class of industrial contaminants most famously used to make Teflon and other nonstick products. Exposure to even very small amounts of these chemicals has been linked with conditions that have been shown to make Covid-19 worse. Phthalates are associated with damage to lungs and obesity, as well as to diabetes, the second most common underlying condition in people who die of Covid-19, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. BPA, which is often added to food packaging and drink bottles, is also linked to obesity, as well as asthma and diabetes. PFAS, which also interferes with the functioning of the endocrine system, has been shown to cause several underlying conditions that leave people more vulnerable to Covid-19. People with higher levels of PFAS in their bodies are more likely to gain weight and have a harder time losing it. The chemicals not only increase obesity risk in those exposed, but also in the granddaughters of women who were exposed. And PFAS is associated with asthma and hypertension, two other conditions that appear to worsen people’s chances of surviving Covid-19. PFAS causes kidney disease and elevates levels of cholesterol and other fats in the blood, which also increase the chances that people with Covid-19 will be hospitalized or need intensive care. Read Our Complete CoverageThe Coronavirus Crisis The vast majority of people who die of Covid-19 had at least one other illness before they got sick from the virus. Compared to people who didn’t have underlying conditions, patients who had kidney disease, diabetes, lung disease, and heart disease, among other conditions, are six times as likely to be hospitalized with Covid-19 and 12 times as likely to die, according to the most recent data from the CDC. In addition to causing medical problems that make people more vulnerable to the coronavirus, several environmental contaminants, including PFAS, also directly weaken the body’s immune response. Studies have shown that in both adults and children higher levels of certain PFAS chemicals were associated with weaker responses to vaccines. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a division of the CDC, recognized this evidence in an announcement it recently posted to its website on the “potential intersection between PFAS exposure and Covid-19.” With the pre-pandemic knowledge of the effects of individual chemicals and the maps showing that Covid-19 is ravaging polluted areas, the next step for researchers is to address how exactly chemicals make individual people more susceptible to Covid-19. “We now know pollution is associated with increased infections and more hospitalizations,” said Birnbaum. “So it has a role. The question is how much of a role and how do you show that an individual is getting sick is because they have higher levels?” Read our complete coverageBad Chemistry Philippe Grandjean, a Danish scientist who was the first to show that children with relatively high PFAS levels had immune deficits and were more likely to get respiratory infections, has already begun to try to answer this question. Grandjean is in the process of collecting blood samples of people who were hospitalized with Covid-19 — “just a few drops of the serum from leftover blood samples that hadn’t been used” — analyzing them for PFAS levels, and comparing them with PFAS levels from the blood of people who were infected with the coronavirus but not hospitalized. “We really need to understand the connection between exposures at the individual level and Covid-19 severity,” Grandjean said. While noting that several environmental contaminants likely increase the risk of the disease, Grandjean expressed particular concern about PFAS compounds because they can remain in the body for years and some of them tend to concentrate in the lungs. Grandjean, who is conducting the research in Denmark, hopes to have results of the study within the year. Others are using animal experiments to explore how chemical exposure affects the impact of the coronavirus. Paige Lawrence, a professor of environmental medicine at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, plans to infect mice with a mouse-adapted human coronavirus that was built from the 2003 SARS pandemic and study how exposure to PFAS alters the course of the viral infection. “We need to understand at a cellular level what’s changed” by chemical exposure, she said. “We can’t improve health if we don’t know what we’re trying to fix.” Lawrence’s past research has shown that the environmental contaminants dioxin and PCBs change the immune system by binding to receptor cells — an effect that, in the case of dioxin, lasts for generations. While the research is underway, many of the people in highly polluted communities worry about the greater risk they may face during the pandemic. “I think about it a lot,” said Hope Grosse, a resident of Warminster, Pennsylvania, who developed stage 4 cancer while drinking water that had been contaminated with PFAS from firefighting foam used at a nearby naval base. “My immune system was definitely impacted.” Grosse, who had 25 lymph nodes removed during her cancer treatment, resumed her work as a realtor last month and wears gloves and a mask when she shows houses. “I’m as careful as I can be, but I still worry,” she said. Whatever we learn from the research now in the pipeline, some scientists say there is already enough evidence to lay blame for at least a portion of the toll of the virus on chemicals — and their manufacturers. “Endocrine-disrupting chemicals are clearly involved in driving the comorbidities and are heightening mortality risk from Covid-19,” said Pete Myers, founder and chief scientist of Environmental Health Sciences. “You can’t hide from that truth.” Myers is one of several environmental scientists who have been pushing for more than a decade — with little success — for government to limit the use of these chemicals. “The American Chemistry Council has impeded our ability to develop meaningful regulations,” said Myers, referring to a powerful chemical industry trade group. “And the result of that is that these comorbidities have become epidemic over the last three decades. And now more people are dying than would have.”

1 0

Should Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Pipelines Cross National Forests & Appalachian Trail
by Duane Nichols 01 Jul '20

01 Jul '20

From the Friends of Nelson in Nelson County, Virginia, where Skyline Drive and the Blue Ridge Parkway cross Interstate 64 at the Appalachian Trail. From Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance's ABRA Update #282, June 25, 2020 The U.S. Forest Service has been cautioned that it should not depend upon the reliability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) developed in 2017 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as the agency develops a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the project. The Forest Service announced on June 11 that it was developing a SEIS in response to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ vacating of the Forest Service permit for the ACP. While one portion of that opinion (e.g. authority to grant the ACP the right to cross the Appalachian Trail) was overturned on June 15 by the U.S. Supreme Court, several deficiencies in the permit for the ACP are required to be remedied by the Forest Service before it can issue the ACP a new permit. The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) stated in a June 22 letter to the Forest Service: The Forest Service cannot continue to rely on FERC’s obsolete FEIS. The original analyses of potential alternatives to the project and the environmental consequences of its risky and costly preferred route are in question. Significant, new and relevant information related to endangered and threatened species, water quality, landslides and slope failures, environmental justice communities, and climate change demonstrates the original analysis is stale and incapable of allowing effective review of the environmental consequences of the project. Meanwhile, the energy landscape of the region the ACP purports to serve also has transformed dramatically, the costs of the project have ballooned, and its timeline has been pushed back. A motion was filed with FERC on May 30 by SELC, Appalachian Mountain Advocates and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation asking that FERC conduct an SEIS for the ACP to address significant new information bearing on the project’s environmental impacts. Read more here: https://www.abralliance.org/2020/06/05/ferc-is-asked-to-conduct-supplementa…

1 0

...... about wearing masks from Jon Reed, from Pat Conner, from Sam Laucks ....
by Duane Nichols 18 Jun '20

18 Jun '20

Jon A. Reed Sr. Says .... Copied this from Patrick Conner's FB post. RETIRED SURGEON, Sam Laucks, has this to say about wearing masks: “OK, here’s my rant about masks: I have spent the past 39 years working in the field of surgery. For a significant part of that time, I have worn a mask. I have worked with hundreds (probably thousands) of colleagues during those years, who have also worn masks. Not a single one us of became ill, passed out or died from lack of oxygen. Not a single one of us became ill, passed out or died from breathing too much carbon dioxide. Not a single one us of became ill, passed out or died from rebreathing a little of our own exhaled air. Let’s begin here by putting those scare tactics to rest! (It is true that some people, with advanced lung diseases, may be so fragile that a mask could make their already-tenuous breathing more difficult. If your lungs are that bad, you probably shouldn’t be going out in public at the present time anyway; the consequences if you are exposed to Covid-19 would likely be devastating.) ~ “But”, you ask, “can’t viruses go right through the mask, because they are so small?” (“Masks keep viruses out just as well as a chain link fence keeps mosquitoes out,” some tell us.) It is true that individual virus particles can pass through the pores of a mask; however, viruses don’t move on their own. They do not fly across the room like a mosquito, wiggle through your mask like a worm, or fly up your nose like a gnat. The virus is essentially nothing more than a tiny blob of genetic material. Covid-19 travels in a CARRIER – the carrier is a fluid droplet- fluid droplets that you expel when you cough, sneeze, sing, laugh, talk or simply exhale. Most of your fluid droplets will be stopped from entering the air in the room if you are wearing a mask. Wearing a mask is a very efficient way to protect others if you are carrying the virus (even if you don’t know that you are infected). In addition, if someone else’s fluid droplets happen to land on your mask, many of them will not pass through. This gives the wearer some additional protection, too. But, the main reason to wear a mask is to PROTECT OTHERS. Even if you don’t care about yourself, wear your mask to protect your neighbors, co-workers and friends! ~ A mask is certainly not 100% protective. However, it appears that the severity of Covid-19 infection is at least partially “dose-dependent.” In other words, the more virus particles that enter your body, the sicker you are likely to become. Why not decrease that volume if you can? “What have you got to lose?!” ~ “But doesn’t a requirement or a request to wear a mask violate my constitutional rights?” You’re also not allowed to go into the grocery store if you are not wearing pants. You can’t yell “fire” in the Produce Department. You’re not allowed to urinate on the floor in the Frozen Food Section. Do you object to those restrictions? Rules, established for the common good, are component of a civilized society. ~ “But aren’t masks uncomfortable?” Some would say that underwear or shoes can be uncomfortable, but we still wear them. (Actually, being on a ventilator is pretty darned uncomfortable, too!) Are masks really so bad that you can’t tolerate them, even if they will help keep others healthy? ~ “But won’t people think I’m a snowflake or a wimp if I wear a mask?” I hope you have enough self-confidence to overcome that. ~ “But won’t I look stupid if I wear a mask?” I’ve decided not to dignify that question with an answer!! 📷📷:) ~ “But I never get sick; I’m not worried.” Well, then, wear a mask for the sake of the rest of us who are not so perfect! There is good evidence that masks make a real difference in diminishing the transmission of Covid-19. Please, for the sake of others (and for the sake of yourself), wear your mask when in public. It won’t kill you! P.S. - And, by the way, please be sure that BOTH your nose and mouth are covered! Recommendations around mask usage are confusing. The science isn't. Evidence shows that masks are extremely effective to slow the coronavirus and may be the best tool available right now to fight it.”

1 0

2020 Earth Day Facts & Research | State of the Earth | USAFacts
by Duane Nichols 17 Jun '20

17 Jun '20

To celebrate the 50th anniversary of Earth Day, USAFacts analyzed metrics from government agencies responsible for measuring the nation’s air, land conservation, and energy production. This data snapshot touches on environmental numbers from 2019 back to 1895. These are historical metrics for perspective—whether they mark positive, negative, or neutral changes for land, energy, and air in the US is up to you. Published April 15th, 2020 https://usafacts.org/earth-day-facts/

1 0

COVID-19 outbreak at church infects 17 | Health | register-herald.com, WV
by Duane Nichols 14 Jun '20

14 Jun '20

COVID-19 outbreak at church infects 17 | Health | register-herald.com, Buckley, WV An outbreak of COVID-19 has been reported at Graystone Baptist Church, a Greenbrier County church in Ronceverte, WV as health officials on Saturday announced up to 17 new confirmed cases. The outbreak caught the attention of Gov. Jim Justice and the state Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR). https://www.register-herald.com/health/covid-19-outbreak-at-church-infects-… Sent from my iPad

1 0

A threat from above: Plastic rains down on US National Parks and Wilderness areas - EHN
by Duane Nichols 12 Jun '20

12 Jun '20

A threat from above: Plastic rains down on US National Parks and Wilderness areas From an Article by Kate S. Petersen, Environmental Health News, June 9, 2020 New research estimates more than 1,000 tons of microplastic particles, potentially circulating in global atmospheric currents, are deposited at conservation sites each year. Last August, scientists delivered the chilling news that microplastics suspended in the Earth's atmosphere were being deposited in remote areas of the Arctic and Europe. Now researchers report similar microplastic accumulation in iconic American protected areas including the Grand Canyon and Joshua Tree. Publishing their results today in Science, the researchers estimate total yearly plastics deposition over their study area to be the equivalent of 123 to 300 million discarded water bottles. The study is the first to calculate rates of microplastic pollution from the atmosphere onto American protected areas and adds to a growing body of research suggesting that microplastics are traveling long distances in the atmosphere. Microplastic pollution can harm wildlife health, and the researchers expressed concern about potential impacts to ecosystem stability in fragile and unique protected areas of the U.S. Janice Brahney, an assistant professor at Utah State University and lead scientist on the new report, made the discovery while analyzing atmospheric dust—particles that get swept up into the atmosphere and then settle out again. Examining the dust under a microscope, she found something she did not expect. "Scrolling around these samples, I started to see all these colorful pieces," Brahney told EHN. "Nearly every single sample had plastic in it." https://www.ehn.org/plastic-pollution-in-national-parks-2646169327.html Sent from my iPad

1 0

Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections Including COVID-19: Q & A
by Duane Nichols 11 Jun '20

11 Jun '20

Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections Including COVID-19: Q & A AIR POLLUTION & RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS SUCH AS COVID-19 From the Newsletter of the Environmental Health Project, Summer, Issue 6, June 2020 EHP has been taking an active look at the connection between air pollution and respiratory infections such as COVID-19. What we’re finding is a stronger relationship than you might imagine. As our blog post “Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections: Q & A” notes, if you’ve been exposed to air pollution and you contract a respiratory infection, your symptoms may be more severe. “A number of scientific studies have shown a link between air pollution and respiratory infections,” said EHP’s public health nurse Sarah Rankin, MPH, RN. “These studies show that being exposed to air pollution may aid in making a respiratory infection worse. It might also increase your chances of getting a respiratory infection in the first place.” Naturally, at EHP, we want to offer ways you can help to protect your health and your family’s health from the effects of pollution in your air. The Q & A blog post talks about how you can monitor the air in and around your home and suggests steps you can take to reduce pollution there. Along those lines, EHP has produced a short video explaining how to make an affordable and effective air filter using a box fan and a HEPA-certified furnace filter. This DIY fan/furnace filter can help to make your home’s air cleaner. If you want to take a deeper dive into the science behind the relationship between air pollution and respiratory infection, you might be interested in EHP’s review of the studies mentioned above. “Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections: Reviewing the Science” looks at more than two dozen research studies that tackle the issue from the standpoint of disease severity, hospitalizations and emergency room visits, and deaths during pandemics, including COVID-19. Feel free to contact EHP for more information on air pollution as it affects your health and well-being. Tagged as: air pollution, chemical pollution, COVID 19, EHP, filters, lung infections

1 0

We Cannot Postpone Climate Talks Until 2021
by Duane Nichols 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/climate-conference-postpone/ We Cannot Postpone Climate Talks Until 2021 Lawmakers need to wake up: Climate change and the injustices it generates won’t break for Covid-19. So the United Nations Climate Change Conference can’t, either. By Ilana Cohen, The Nation, June 5, 2020 Sixteen-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg speaks at the 2019 United Nations Climate Action Summit. (Carlo Allegri / Reuters Pictures) On the heels of a pandemic that is hitting communities of color the hardest, and while protests for racial justice following the murder of George Floyd rock the nation and world, it is vital for meaningful climate dialogues to continue. Yet Britain last week proposed postponing international climate talks until November 2021. The potential costs of doing so are stark. Most strikingly, it will likely result in economic recovery plans by nations that seek to revitalize a fundamentally unsustainable and unjust status quo, one which harms under-resourced communities the most and which puts the futures of my peers and myself second to the profits of big corporations. If we recognize the urgency around climate change—if we want a livable planet for today’s young people and, more pressingly, if we are really committed to combating the racial violence that pervades our political, social, and economic systems—then these costs are far too high for our leaders to risk with delay. Lawmakers need to wake up: Climate change and the injustices it generates won’t break for Covid-19. So the United Nations Climate Change Conference can’t, either. It is certainly within our nations’ technological capacities to ensure that they aren’t pushed into the future. But more than that, it is within their basic political and ethical responsibilities to make the 26th annual Conference of the Party (COP) an imminent reality by whatever means possible. Already, fossil fuel companies are preparing to line their coffers with federal bailouts. They are demanding regulatory relief as the price of oil hits record lows. They’ve spent this pandemic continuing to push through pipelines, frequently at the expense of indigenous communities like the Wet’suwet’en, all under the cover of a mainstream media dominated by Covid-19 coverage. The potential for a postponed COP gives these bad actors even more wiggle room to exploit the current crisis, securing a model of business that will wreck the environment and jeopardize our futures. And it’s happening right under our noses. At the same time, the effects of climate change are already becoming more palpable. We’re approaching a potentially record-breaking Atlantic hurricane season, which will put coastal and low-lying communities now struggling to shelter in place from Covid-19 in a uniquely precarious position— fierce storms may necessitate evacuation. And with climate change increasing the likelihood for the spread of infectious disease, we’re only sampling the harsh intersection of our environmental and public health emergencies. Current Issue If our government officials really want an economy and a planet that does not discriminate along racial, gender, and socioeconomic lines and that can support all of their children and grandchildren, then they need to radically rethink business as usual. Preserving the status quo puts us on the trajectory toward climate apartheid, with those who can afford to escape the worst effects of climate change doing so while leaving our most vulnerable and historically marginalized community members behind, as we have already seen during this pandemic. Investing in an economy that works for young people means investing in a more environmentally sustainable and socially responsible system, not just for the coming, post-pandemic years but also for the coming decades. That starts with the policies we put in place to recover from Covid-19. Like the coronavirus crisis, tackling the climate crisis and the injustices it generates necessitates innovation. We have to think creatively and strategically if we’re going to achieve the rapid and equitable transition to a clean energy economy within the next decade that is necessary, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to avert potentially catastrophic and irreversible impacts of climate change. And with surging demand for jobs, now is the opportune moment for such thinking. But if world leaders fail to forge a way forward for a safe and effective COP conference in the time of Covid-19, then we’re in a worse position on climate change than many of us could have ever imagined. The kind of thinking we need on the scale that we need it seems unlikely, in this case, to come to fruition. Already, scores of universities have made the transition to online learning. Companies have learned to organize business meetings over video conferencing platforms to continue conducting daily business as much as possible. With access to the world’s top health experts, perhaps our government leaders can make possible a socially distanced COP. But if not, why can’t our world leaders at least convene a remote one? University students have managed to Zoom into higher education from around the world; I’d hope that our top-ranking officials could display the same resolve to stave off an existential global threat. A remote COP may not hold quite the same appeal as the traditional in-person conference and, certainly, any dependence on online and remote technologies will produce new challenges in logistics and accessibility. But as universities and institutions are learning to overcome such hurdles, so could our leaders. Convening COP could quite literally make a world of difference, because it could radically alter the world we end up with decades from now. At the very least, it will provide an opportunity to halt the development and proliferation of economic recovery plans that do further damage to our planet and burden our most vulnerable communities. More than that, it could provide a unique chance to harness international cooperation to advance the bold agenda needed to tackle both climate and Covid-19. Otherwise, our leaders risk sacrificing even more lives and livelihoods to the climate crisis on top of those lost to the current pandemic. Many of us have become all too familiar with the sounds of sirens over the last few months and with worries that our neighbors, family, and friends will next enter the ambulance. Delaying COP and risking the adoption of policies that fail to mitigate or that even exacerbate climate change may only increase the buildup of bodies that this pandemic and the state-sanctioned violence rising in its midst ultimately produce. For many of us, the reality of tomorrow alone—not to mention the future beyond that next day—feels highly uncertain right now. The financial, mental, physical, and emotional stresses of this moment weigh differently on people in different circumstances, but no one is immune. In a few decades or so, without dramatic action, we’ll face the same reality with climate change—as low-lying and developing nations have already. If we want our future to look different, we have to seize this political moment. A 26th annual COP, a uniting of leaders around our shared world, is a critical step in making that possible. This story was produced for Student Nation, a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words. The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation.

1 0

Cornell announces moratorium on fossil fuel investments | Cornell Chronicle
by Duane Nichols 29 May '20

29 May '20

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/05/cornell-announces-moratorium-fossi… Cornell announces moratorium on fossil fuel investments By James Dean, Cornell Chronicle, May 22, 2020 The Cornell University Board of Trustees voted May 22 to support a decision by its Investment Committee to institute a moratorium on new private investments focused on fossil fuels and to grow its investments in alternative energy technologies. The moratorium emerged from the committee’s review of Cornell’s $6.9 billion endowment portfolio; the near- and medium-term financial outlook for the coal, oil and gas industries; and the potential threat posed by climate change, according to a resolution approved by trustees. “There’s a growing recognition that we’re transitioning away from fossil fuels globally, and the economic competitiveness of renewable energy sources is rising,” said Ken Miranda, the university’s chief investment officer. “We’re doing the right thing from an investment perspective, particularly for an endowment with a perpetual time horizon.” Effective immediately, the moratorium applies to new private equity and bond vehicles focused on fossil fuels, a category that makes up about 4.2% of Cornell’s long-term investments, Miranda said. That percentage is expected to dwindle to zero over time as existing investments mature and assets are redeployed to other areas, including renewables, he said. The new policy does not apply to indexed and other public equity mandates, such as the S&P 500, where typically the university may be one of hundreds or thousands of investors and does not have the ability to alter an index’s composition or direct managers to include or exclude particular securities. As a matter of policy, the Investment Office does not invest directly in any individual equity securities, including those of fossil fuel companies. The moratorium formalizes practices the portfolio had already been following for some time, Miranda said, and builds upon several strategies Cornell has implemented as part of the gradual transition toward more environmentally friendly energy sources. More than 70% of the university’s assets under investment are run by managers committed to considering environmental, social or governance issues in their investment decisions, through frameworks including the U.N. Principles for Responsible Investment. The resolution trustees endorsed on May 22 calls for growing that percentage. The Investment Committee already had changed its proxy voting policies to require fund managers voting on Cornell’s behalf to emphasize the maximization of long-term sustainable economic value over short-term gains. Proxy voting enables Cornell to push corporate managers and boards to pursue more sustainable practices, Miranda said. Now, the Investment Committee has also directed the endowment to redouble its efforts to invest in more energy-efficient and new technologies, such as carbon reduction and carbon capture, “that offer competitive risk-adjusted rates of return and which help in a transition to a more sustainable future, both nationally and globally,” according to the board resolution. “We’ve been doing that for quite some time,” Miranda said, “but we’re going to enhance that.” Cornell’s Investment Office has a mandate to support the university’s research, education and engagement missions, including providing need-blind financial aid to expand access. The Investment Committee determined that the moratorium and other new measures were “consistent with its fiduciary and stewardship responsibilities,” according to the resolution. Beyond its investment portfolio, Cornell is recognized as a leader in sustainability research and education and has committed to a goal of becoming a carbon neutral campus by 2035, trustees have noted. Through Lake Source Cooling, the university uses water from Cayuga Lake as a renewable source of chilled water, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and it is exploring Earth Source Heat, a proposed enhanced geothermal system for heating campus. Cornell was ranked first among the Ivies in national sustainability ratings by the Princeton Review. The university’s sixth large-scale solar project came online in January, doubling the amount of campus net electricity offset by renewable energy credits from 10% to 20%. The Cornell hydroelectric plant doubled production in the past year, increasing renewable power to campus. And the university has certified 26 green buildings, including 18 meeting LEED Gold and five meeting LEED Platinum criteria, according to the Campus Sustainability Office. In recent months, all five of Cornell’s governance bodies – the Faculty Senate and the Employee, Graduate and Professional Student, Student and University assemblies – have passed resolutions calling for the university to divest from fossil fuels. The Investment Office shares the long-term goal of reducing reliance on fossil fuels and accelerating a shift to greener technologies while meeting its fiduciary obligations, Miranda said. The moratorium, new alternative energy investments, increased use of socially responsible managers and existing proxy voting guidelines represent a strong approach to gradually reaching that goal, he said. “We’re still focusing on risk-reward, but we know that technology is changing every day and we have to get in front of technology,” Miranda said. “Increasingly, the world is evolving to an alternative energy future.” >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Tomorrow! Frackland Tour: Virtual Edition
by Duane Nichols 20 May '20

20 May '20

From: Clean Air Council <members(a)cleanair.org> > Date: May 20, 2020 at 11:22:03 AM EDT > To: MonValley Clean Air Coalition > Subject: Tomorrow! Frackland Tour: Virtual Edition > Reply-To: Clean Air Council <rzerbo(a)cleanair.org> > > Dear MonValley Clean Air Coalition, > > On May 21 at 12PM EDT, Clean Air Council, Breathe Project, Earthworks, Environmental Health Project and Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility will be co-sponsoring a virtual frackland tour. > > This presentation can be viewed on EHP's Facebook at facebook.com/EnvironmentalHealthProject, EHP's website at www.environmentalhealthproject.org, or the Breathe Project's YouTube page at www.youtube.com/user/breatheproject. > > Presenters include: > *Matthew Mehalik, Breathe Project > *Ned Ketyer, Environmental Health Project and Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility > *Lois Bjorson, Clean Air Council > *Leann Leiter, Earthworks > *Impacted Pennsylvania residents > > Following the presentation, there will be a live Q&A.

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

MVCAC