HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Maraya1969 » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Tue Oct 12, 2004, 11:32 PM
Number of posts: 18,674

Journal Archives

I believe Trump is the new defendent in historical case on rights of children against fossil fuel

industry. His dismantlement of EPA makes him defendant #1 at this point. I don't if they would have to file another suit but this one would make a precedent.

Federal Court Affirms Constitutional Rights of Kids in Landmark Climate Case


EUGENE, Oregon - On April 8, 2016, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin of the federal District Court in Eugene, OR, decided in favor of 21 young Plaintiffs, and Dr. James Hansen on behalf of future generations, in their landmark constitutional climate change case brought against the federal government and the fossil fuel industry. The Court’s ruling is a major victory for the 21 youth Plaintiffs, ages 8-19, from across the U.S. in what Bill McKibben and Naomi Klein call the “most important lawsuit on the planet right now.” These plaintiffs sued the federal government for violating their constitutional rights to life, liberty and property, and their right to essential public trust resources, by permitting, encouraging, and otherwise enabling continued exploitation, production, and combustion of fossil fuels.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Philip Gregory with Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy of Burlingame, CA, said: “This decision is one of the most significant in our nation’s history. The Court upheld our claims that the federal government intensified the danger to our plaintiffs’ lives, liberty and property. Judge Coffin decided our Complaint will move forward and put climate science squarely in front of the federal courts. The next step is for the Court to order our government to cease jeopardizing the climate system for present and future generations. The Court gave America’s youth a fair opportunity to be heard.”

As part of Friday’s historic decision, Judge Coffin characterized the case as an “unprecedented lawsuit” addressing “government action and inaction” resulting “in carbon pollution of the atmosphere, climate destabilization, and ocean acidification.” In deciding the case will proceed, Judge Coffin wrote: “The debate about climate change and its impact has been before various political bodies for some time now. Plaintiffs give this debate justiciability by asserting harms that befall or will befall them personally and to a greater extent than older segments of society. It may be that eventually the alleged harms, assuming the correctness of plaintiffs' analysis of the impacts of global climate change, will befall all of us. But the intractability of the debates before Congress and state legislatures and the alleged valuing of short term economic interest despite the cost to human life, necessitates a need for the courts to evaluate the constitutional parameters of the action or inaction taken by the government. This is especially true when such harms have an alleged disparate impact on a discrete class of society.”


From Twitter



U.S. will change course on climate policy, Trump official says

The United States will switch course on climate change and pull out of a global pact to cut emissions, said Myron Ebell, who headed U.S. President Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team until his inauguration.

"Trump) could do it by executive order tomorrow or he could do it as part of a larger package," Ebell told a conference in London on Monday. "I have no idea of the timing."

Trump, a climate change doubter, campaigned on a pledge to boost the U.S. oil and gas drilling and coal mining industries by slashing regulation. He also promised to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement aimed at curbing global warming.

Trump's administration has asked the EPA to temporarily halt all contracts, grants and interagency agreements pending a review, according to sources.

Found on Twitter

The biggest polluter in Florida and contact information

This company is horrible regarding the amount of toxins in spews in the air. At the very least they should have plenty of people complaining and letting them know that WE KNOW what is going on

EPA list of top polluters in FL. One is far and above the others.



3000 OLD CHEMSTRAND ROAD, CANTONMENT, FL 32533 Facility caveat

Industry: Plastics Material And Resin Manufacturing, All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing, Noncellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing, Cyclic Crude And Intermediate Manufacturing, Petrochemical Manufacturing
ICIS-Air Source ID: FL0000001203300040
ICIS-Air Facility Status: Operating Major Emissions



Message from EPA

Bill Maher How the opiate epidemic caused trump


I turned it on. So far 3 Christian pastors giving Christian prayers

I seriously hope there are representatives from other religions.

I fucking doubt it.

I wish they would start asking these climate deniers these questions

How do you feel about the fossil fuels from cars and trucks damaging our children's health in this country? In particular, how do you feel about the pollution from fossil fuels affecting your own children's health?

I really want to know the answer to that.

And I know most people have cars and not many can afford electric or hybrid vehicles. But Obama put in measures to lower car emissions and the prices of hybrids are going down. But they won't go down if the oil industry runs Washington. The oil industry, I'm sure has fought to keep cars using more gas because that is where there money comes from

Many studies have demonstrated that there is a relation between air pollution and respiratory health among children, especially affecting children with asthma.

Along with these studies, which point clearly and consistently to the toxic effects of polluted air on our respiratory systems, there are others that offer clues as to how these negative effects have much wider consequences than was at first thought. Perhaps one of the least expected conclusions was demonstrated by researchers able to associate prenatal exposure to air pollution to miscarriage, premature birth, congenital heart malformations and low birth weight. That is not all: it has also been shown that exposure to air pollution is related to the development of certain chronic diseases, especially affecting the respiratory system. For example, a study done in Germany before and after reunification showed that lower air pollution had brought about a corresponding reduction in the number of children with chronic bronchitis.

Air pollution caused by traffic has also been associated with the development of atopy (allergic tendency) and respiratory sounds, especially when exposure is to polluted environments with particles liberated by diesel motor combustion. Because they are smaller, these particles can penetrate more deeply into the lungs, where it has been shown they can remain for a longer period of time as well. Particles from these kinds of fuels have been designated as cancer-causing toxic agents by some organizations in the United States. An American study on exposure to multiple air toxins found that these particles are responsible for approximately 70% of all cancer risk caused by contaminated air in the metropolitan area of Los Angeles. Furthermore, they can act as allergens, bringing about allergic reactions.


Here is some information about what comes out cars and trucks when we use them.

The ingredients of air pollution

Cars and trucks produce air pollution throughout their life, including pollution emitted during vehicle operation, refueling, manufacturing, and disposal. Additional emissions are associated with the refining and distribution of vehicle fuel.

Air pollution from cars and trucks is split into primary and secondary pollution. Primary pollution is emitted directly into the atmosphere; secondary pollution results from chemical reactions between pollutants in the atmosphere. The following are the major pollutants from motor vehicles:

Particulate matter (PM). These particles of soot and metals give smog its murky color. Fine particles — less than one-tenth the diameter of a human hair — pose the most serious threat to human health, as they can penetrate deep into lungs. PM is a direct (primary) pollution and a secondary pollution from hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and sulfer dioxides. Diesel exhaust is a major contributor to PM pollution.

Hydrocarbons (HC). These pollutants react with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight to form ground level ozone, a primary ingredient in smog. Though beneficial in the upper atmosphere, at the ground level this gas irritates the respiratory system, causing coughing, choking, and reduced lung capacity.

Nitrogen oxides (NOx). These pollutants cause lung irritation and weaken the body's defenses against respiratory infections such as pneumonia and influenza. In addition, they assist in the formation of ground level ozone and particulate matter.

Carbon monoxide (CO). This odorless, colorless, and poisonous gas is formed by the combustion of fossil fuels such as gasoline and is emitted primarily from cars and trucks. When inhaled, CO blocks oxygen from the brain, heart, and other vital organs. Fetuses, newborn children, and people with chronic illnesses are especially susceptible to the effects of CO.

Sulfur dioxide (SO2). Power plants and motor vehicles create this pollutant by burning sulfur-containing fuels, especially diesel. Sulfur dioxide can react in the atmosphere to form fine particles and poses the largest health risk to young children and asthmatics.

Hazardous air pollutants (toxics). These chemical compounds have been linked to birth defects, cancer, and other serious illnesses. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the air toxics emitted from cars and trucks — which include Benzene, acetaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene — account for half of all cancers caused by air pollution.

Go to Page: 1 2 Next »