Title: what I want to make clear understanding in the lobster case
Yesterday's class was very interesting with the Ostrom's framework and lobster case, but I am confused with some ideas. As far as I understood in Ostrom's case, we can assume that there is a hope in preventing envrionmental degradation because of "Political decision'. Each people only can be economically rational and act for their own benefits. However, when they work together as an organization, their is another power to act , and they can think about their envionment and how their actions will influence to society and environments. So, I thoutht that the assumption of Ostrom's framework towards human nature is positive perspective.
However, in the lobster case, I can not agree (or understand)that this case shows the priciples and assumptions of her framworks well. Of course, It really shows how the political dynamics and all lobbies made the laws(norms) become more friendly to environment, especially to lobsters. However, I think all the lobbies to local governments and struggles between canners and fresh lobster dealers are just accomplished for their own profits and benefits. Even though they (canners and fresh lobster dealers) tried to make laws be useful to themselves, the other factors such as the special physical traits of lobsters make it possible for lobsters to be conserved in their position.
I can not catch the meanings of the political/Institutional power framework in ostrom's theory. I am not sure I did understand the Ostrom's framework exactly. Frankly speaking, I could not understand or connect exactly the 8 traits of her framework with lobster case.
I hope to get your answers about it.
My another question: I am not sure it is ok to leave my comments about the article and lecture which we studied in class. Next time, I will try to convey new and hot news of environments.
3. China never stops surprising the world! While New York, the most advanced city in the world was considering, China, a less developed nation declared to ban plastic bags and showed the world how seriously it concerned about pollution. One of the advantages of the communist national country seems to be able to make decisions and take actions quicker, if it’s for the better.
----------------------------------- China announced this week that production and use of plastic bags in supermarkets and retail shops will be banned beginning June 1. This new law could have a considerably positive environmental impact, given that Chinese citizens "use as many as 3 billion plastic bags a day." The law is part of a larger campaign to fight "white pollution" in China, which includes other forms of rampant plastic and styrofoam use as well. This bold and surprising move demonstrates that the Chinese government is starting to take pollution concerns seriously. While a few city governments here in the U.S. have passed (San Francisco) or are considering passing similar legislation (New York), it is refreshing to see a national government as powerful and influential as the China make such a decision. So, how will plastics manufacturers, retailers, and citizens react? Anecdotal comments from the AP story show that citizens and retailers welcome the move. Sturdier plastic bags will continue to be available and the manufacturing of cloth bags can be expected to rise. In addition, Reuters reported that the Chinese government "signaled it may tweak the tax code to give the recycling industry a boost." Could this law trigger similar laws from other national governments? How could this work in the U.S.? I invite readers from the San Francisco region to comment on the effectiveness of plastic ban regulation in their city. --------- http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/29017/
2. Title: China Struggles to Balance Economy with Environment
3. China struggles with very sensitive concers. It means the choice of priority between economy and environment. However, it is not easy matter to decide. Every developing countries hope to make economy bloom, but there is also a pressure of the world for maintaing the state of environment. The developing countries argue that there is hidden politics which makes countries not to develop and growth economically.
Yes, so I think this chemical spilt accident and all reactions of the world shows the hot interests toward environment. However, it is really hard to understand and make a sollution when the matters is connected with politics between peoples.
----------------------------
In its rush to modernize, China is struggling to balance the demands of a booming economy with growing environmental concerns. This struggle recently erupted onto front pages around the world after a chemical explosion poisoned a major waterway.
An explosion last month at a chemical factory in Jilin, a city in northeastern China, released about 100 tons of toxic chemicals, including cancer causing benzene, into the Songhua River.
The chemical slick has traveled downriver towards Russia and threatens to poison the water supply of ten million.
In the Chinese city of Harbin, a city of 3.8 million people about 250 miles from the accident, the water supply has been shut off and people wait in long lines to receive water sent in from neighboring regions.
"We are now frugal with water," a woman from Harbin tells Salon. "First we use it to clean vegetables, then to wash our hands, and finally to flush the toilet."
The Songhua River in China flows into the Heilong River which becomes the Amur River in Russia.
Officials expect the chemicals to arrive in the Russian city of Khabarovsk by Dec. 10 or 11.
The Russian Far East city of 580,000 is bracing for water shortages and even heat shortages, as the city uses a centralized heating system in which hot water is piped through radiators.
Many don't trust that their government will protect them. Some liken the event to when the Chernobyl Nuclear plant exploded in Ukraine in 1986, once part of the former Soviet Union. It is considered the worst nuclear accident in history. The Soviet government was accused of trying to cover up the accident which ended up killing some 50 people and exposing thousands to harmful radiation.
Reading and Discussion Questions "People remember Chernobyl, when the government didn't say anything for days or warn residents," regional government spokeswoman Natalya Zimina told the Associated Press.
The United States has announced that it is sending experts to help China cope with the toxic spill as it reaches the Russian border.
After initially trying to downplay the environmental disaster by sending in water trucks covered with banners proclaiming how well the government is treating the people, Chinese officials are now admitting that some in the government acted improperly.
The country's chief environmental official, Xie Zhenhua, quit his post Friday and accepted responsibility for the spill.
Complicating the matter, Xie's chief deputy Wang Yuqing said local Jilin officials initially failed to report the factory accident, which prevented the spill from being better controlled, the China Daily reported.
Some regional leaders gave "tacit consent to the discharge of pollutants into rivers in the pursuit of economic growth," Wang said.
However, no local officials have yet to be punished and Xie remains a member of the Communist Party's Central Committee - the inner circle that controls much of the nation's political power.
China's economy is growing rapidly following market reforms that allowed a shift from pure communist market ideas to a blend of more socialist and capitalist market ideas.
But that growth has impacted negatively on the environment and the safety of workers. According to official statistics, 350 Chinese die daily in industrial accidents. But the true number may be much higher.
An explosion at a state-owned coal mine in Qitaihe, in northeastern China, killed 171 miners in late November.
In response to the latest blast, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao criticized the coal industry.
"The various safety measures we've formulated haven't been really implemented, and many of them are no more than passed down or repeated orally," he said.
Despite government assurances that mine safety will improve, families of miners killed in Qitaihe are resigned that their dangerous life will continue.
"There's nothing we can do about it," former miner and the father of a killed miner told the Associated Press. "We need to work, and the work is dangerous. We need to get on with life."
As China's economy continues to expand at a record pace, the central government in Beijing must face the growing dangers its own success are posing to the nation's workers and environment.
Throughtout the week, we've taken a close look at the oceans such as plastic pollutions in gyres and the fishery decline. This article is also about how the oceans are suffering, but in a different way.
Due to the increasing amount of CO2 emitted by factories, power plants and cars, more and more CO2 are absorbed by the sea water, making it more acidic. As a result, shells of marine organisms corrode that eventually may lead to the breakdown of the ecosystem.
I believe that this article can also be an example of 'hybridity'. The emission of the gas CO2 is one of the major global concerns regarding the environment. Politically, the subject has been discussed among nations to decrease the amount of the CO2. However, for economic benefits, it seems hard for them to reach the agreement or abide by the rules to restrict the amount of the emission of the CO2. Such conflict appears in the relationship between the government and individuals as well. In the meantime, our poor sea friends are crying out for support...snif snif..
-----------------------------------
By Jennifer S. Holland National Geographic Staff
Tiny creatures near the base of the marine food chain lead perilous lives at best. Now they face a man-made threat. No, not global warming this time, though the root cause is the same. As the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) rises, it is not only heating the globe but also dissolving in ocean waters, turning them more acidic. For shell-building animals that can mean a corrosive, even deadly environment.
Oceans are a natural sink for CO2, already soaking up more than a quarter of what's released into the atmosphere. Today we're pumping out massive quantities—a surge that began more than a century ago as factories, power plants, and cars began devouring fossil fuels. By now the oceans are taking in 25 million tons a day of excess CO2, and it is starting to show. Already scientists have measured a rise in acidity of some 30 percent in surface waters, and they predict a 100 to 150 percent increase by the end of the century.
No ill effects have been documented so far in the open ocean, but the threat is clear. Absorbed by seawater, CO2 reacts to form carbonic acid, which turns the normally alkaline water more acidic. In the process, fewer carbonate ions are left floating around—and many marine organisms, including mollusks and corals, rely on carbonate from seawater to build their shells and other hard parts. Eventually, vital species will no longer be able to build or maintain their shells and skeletons.
Users of the mineral aragonite—a very soluble type of calcium carbonate—are especially vulnerable. They include tiny pteropod snails, which help feed commercially vital fish like salmon. Computer models predict that polar waters will turn hostile for pteropods within 50 years (cold water holds the most CO2, so it is already less shell-friendly). By 2100, habitat for many shelled species could shrink drastically, with impacts up the food chain. And as the acidification reaches the tropics, "it's a doomsday scenario for coral reefs," says Carnegie Institution oceanographer Ken Caldeira. If current trends continue, he predicts, reefs will one day survive only in walled-off, acid-controlled refuges.
Massive outbursts of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have acidified the oceans in the geologic past, but equilibrium returned as the oceans stored away excess CO2 in minerals on the seafloor. This time nature may be slow to heal. "Our emissions are huge compared with natural fluxes," Caldeira says. "If you could stop emissions and wait 10,000 years, natural processes would probably take care of most of it." These days we're simply dishing it out faster than the oceans can mop it up. --------
1. Hea joung Lee 2. Environmental pollution of Kosovo
3. I know that Kosovo is strife area. Kosovo independent from Ugoslabia. But they fight Serbia and Albania. Kosovo's people suffer because of pollution as well as war. There are many mineral dioposit. But because of war the diposit is KosoVo is letting. So heavy metal suffer to Kosovo's people. Specially lead pollution is serious. Environmental pollution is include many problem. There are disagreement of world, disagreement of nation, and disagreement of class. How slove the Kosovo polution? Untill the war is end, we wait? Or does international ogernization should intervene?
---------
ln Kwangju scientific technology institute Kim Gyung Oong (environment engineering and professor) who is a ground pollution specialist the international environment laboratory chief from the last year world health organization (WHO) was different pattern and it was proposed. Investigates the heavy metal be imbrued actual condition of Kosovo which is a disputed area of Europe and it was a request which requests. From one sufferer village of the northern part city Mittlobbycar of Kosovo where the tension is amplified in nation discord of Albania total and Serbia total the innumerable difficulties house sibling. It came out from the WHO. It investigates a sufferer village environment the bedspread. Ethnic minority Albania humanity and justice 90% inside Serbia Fall in from Kosovo which lives Serbia taking count of crosses majority hold it is because is an area where it is only it does. Kosovo independence it lets and one time a discord the residents which are a neighborhood cousin are separated at several years two and they knead. The this region general fatigue it is sick recently in leaden be imbrued of worst. The Kim major general who enters to the Mitlobbycar stream all of a sudden was yellow in the situation which gets wider in close at hand. It means that the heavy metal powder pile of shallow hillock height to the stream here and there is exposed in defenselessness. Only the wind which when it holds it will blow and it was an attitude which will fly away. It writes the mask and swells up softly and the degree example bedspread where the wind which comes will be afraid. The wind blows once and the heavy metal powder which is let alone in the open air flies away with the neighborhood area in minute. Maximum victim children The maximum victim of leaden be imbrued should have fallen about 6000 where it dwells in this region name. To that place child wild middle unusually the height decease the child who is undersized is more the same age than. The children have and the lead which to the soil which it divides is goes mad and effect it hangs. The children who are exposed to the lead which is a heavy metal undergo the development disorder which is serious. Leaden be imbrued of the mitt lobby car house hour sufferer village came minimum 5.5 boats international standard than, the maximum 125 it conceives but to reveal with the high thing. This report comes to send to this month end WHO, with the fact that in countermeasure preparation of the international community it will be used with ground. Also the Kim major general holds this result and again as the plan toward Kosovo does.
총탄과 납가루가 춤추는 죽음의 지대로…
토양오염 전문가인 광주과학기술원 김경웅(환경공학과 교수) 국제환경연구소장은 지난해 세계보건기구(WHO)에서 색다른 제안을 받았다. 유럽의 분쟁지역인 코소보의 중금속 오염 실태를 조사해 달라는 요청이었다.
알바니아계와 세르비아계의 민족 갈등으로 긴장이 증폭되고 있는 코소보의 북부 도시 미트로비차의 한 난민촌에서 만난 집시 형제. 사진 제공 김경웅
잠시 망설임을 뒤로하고 김 소장은 1월 27일부터 2월 2일까지 전운이 감도는 현지를 다녀왔다. 그리고 이달 초 가장 오염이 심각한 코소보 북부 미트로비차 지역에서 가져온 토양 시료 분석을 끝냈다.
○ 세계 최악의 납 오염지대
“무슨 일로 오셨습니까?” “WHO에서 나왔습니다. 난민촌 환경을 조사하려고요.”
1월 27일 김 소장이 코소보로 들어가는 길은 시작부터 긴장감이 맴돌았다. 미트로비차 지역으로 가는 마지막 관문. 헬멧을 눌러쓰고 손에는 자동소총을 든 병사가 다가와 김 소장이 탄 지프를 멈춰 세웠다.
방문지인 미트로비차는 복잡한 이해관계에 얽혀 있다. 세르비아 내 소수민족 알바니아인의 90%가 모여 사는 코소보에서 세르비아계가 다수를 차지하는 유일한 지역이기 때문이다. 코소보 독립을 두고 한때는 이웃사촌이었던 주민들이 수년째 둘로 갈려 갈등을 빚고 있다. 최근 이 지역은 최악의 납 오염에 몸살을 앓고 있다.
미트로비차 시내에 들어선 김 소장은 눈앞에 벌어진 상황에 깜짝 놀랐다. 야트막한 야산 높이의 중금속 가루 더미가 시내 곳곳에 무방비 상태로 노출돼 있던 것이다. 언제든 바람만 불면 날아갈 태세였다.
“마스크를 써도 살랑살랑 불어오는 바람이 두려울 정도예요. 일단 바람이 불면 노천에 방치된 중금속 가루는 삽시간에 인근 지역으로 날아가죠.”
1990년대 유고연방이 해체되기 전만 해도 이 지역은 대표적인 광산지대로 손꼽혀 왔다. 그러나 연방 해체와 함께 관리가 소홀해지면서 중금속 가루가 노천에 그대로 방치된 것이다.
○ 최대 피해자는 집시 아이들
납 오염의 최대 피해자는 이 지역에 거주하는 6000여 명의 집시다. ‘떠도는 사람들’로 불리는 집시의 거주 환경은 1960년대 한국의 판자촌 수준에 머물러 있었다. 특히 집시 아이들은 중금속 오염에 무방비로 노출돼 있었다.
“그곳 아이들 중에는 유난히 또래보다 키가 작고 왜소한 아이가 많아요. 아이들이 갖고 노는 흙에 있는 납이 영향을 미친 겁니다.”
중금속인 납에 노출된 아이들은 심각한 발육 장애를 겪는다. 코와 피부를 파고드는 납 성분은 영양 상태가 좋지 않은 노약자에겐 치명적이다. 김 소장은 아이들이 놀 만한 놀이터와 골목 구석구석에서 토양 샘플을 채취하기로 했다. 김 교수가 한 집시 난민촌에서 가져와 분석한 토양의 납 오염도는 WHO가 정한 기준보다 100배나 높았다.
조사팀이 도시 안팎을 조사하는 동안 세르비아계와 알바니아계 주민들도 경계의 고삐를 늦추지 않았다.
“지역의 의사들은 극히 소수를 제외하고 심각성을 전혀 깨닫지 못하고 있었죠. 안정적인 생활을 하는 주민들만 상대하다 보니 모두 건강하다고 착각하고 있어요.”
이번 조사에 김 소장을 끌어들인 사람은 WHO 유럽사무소 환경보건센터에서 활동하고 있던 김록호 박사였다. 김 박사는 코소보를 다녀온 의사들을 통해 이 지역의 심각성을 익히 알고 있었다. 그는 서울 사당의원 원장으로 재직하던 1990년대 초 원진레이온에서 직업병 환자가 발생하자 진상 규명에 앞장서기도 했다. 그런 그의 눈에 수년째 동남아시아 곳곳에서 비소 오염 연구를 해오던 김 소장이 들어온 것은 우연이 아니다.
○ 사선 넘어 만든 보고서 3월 보고
김 소장은 지난해 비소 오염으로 심한 몸살을 앓고 있는 메콩 강 일대의 오염 지도를 완성했다. 지금도 김 소장은 납이나 카드뮴, 비소 같은 중금속에 오염된 지역이면 어디든 달려간다.
김 소장이 미트로비차에 머무는 동안 시료 채취는 4일간이나 계속됐다. 세르비아계와 알바니아계 주민 간에 언제 총격전이 일어날지 모르는 일촉즉발의 상황도 계속됐다.
이달 초 그 결과를 분석한 보고서에는 미트로비차의 참혹한 현실이 속속들이 적혀 있다. 미트로비차 집시 난민촌의 납 오염은 국제 기준보다 최소 5.5배, 최대 125배나 높은 것으로 밝혀졌다. 이 보고서는 이달 말 WHO에 보내져 국제사회의 대책 마련에 근거로 이용될 것으로 보인다. 김 소장도 이 결과를 들고 다시 코소보로 향할 예정이라고 한다. 이제는 진짜로 대책을 세워야 할 시점이기 때문이다.
3. China is trying to protect their environment by solar-cell industry. Although solar-cell product aims to make a better environment, it has left behind a toxic pollution in Chinese villages and farmlands. Environmental industry is only one of the most well-exported production in China. According to this article, I feel that environmental industry in China brings more serious pollution finally.
----------------------------------- 4. As people worldwide increasingly feel the heat of climate change, many are applauding the skyrocketing growth China’s fledging solar-cell industry. Solar power and other “green” technologies, by providing electricity from renewable energy sources like the sun and wind, create hope for a world free of coal-burning pollution and natural resource depletion. A recent Washington Post article, however, has revealed that China’s booming solar industry is not as green as one might expect. Many of the solar panels that now adorn European and American rooftops have left behind a legacy of toxic pollution in Chinese villages and farmlands.
The Post article describes how Luoyang Zhonggui, a major Chinese polysilicon manufacturer, is dumping toxic factory waste directly on to the lands of neighboring villages, killing crops and poisoning residents. Other polysilicon factories in the country have similar problems, either because they have not installed effective pollution control equipment or they are not operating these systems to full capacity. Polysilicon is a key component of the sunlight-capturing wafers used in solar photovoltaic (PV) cells.
China is now a global leader in solar PV manufacture. According to the recent Worldwatch Institute report Powering China’s Development: The Role of Renewable Energy, PV production capacity in China jumped from 350 megawatts (MW) in 2005 to over 1,000 MW in 2006, with 1,500 MW estimated for 2007. High-profile initial public stock offerings for several Chinese companies, some valued in the billions of dollars, have focused global attention on how this industry will progress—having literally developed from scratch into the world’s third largest PV industry in just five years. Most of this development, however, is driven by global demand, with over 90 percent of Chinese-made solar PV systems being exported to Europe, Japan, and the United States.
Technologies exist to recycle the chemical byproducts of solar-cell production, but some Chinese polysilicon plants, including Luoyang Zhonggui, are cutting costs and corners by avoiding significant extra investment in pollution control. The cheaper prices of their products, which do not currently factor in environmental costs, are projected to fan the rapid expansion of Chinese-made solar PV systems around the world, especially in industrial countries that can afford the still-expensive units.
Although China will eventually benefit from this green technology as well as costs decline further, for the time being the industry continues to tread the traditional path of “pollute first, clean up afterwards.” At stake are the underrepresented groups in Chinese society, especially rural farmers who depend on increasingly polluted lands for a living. China’s shining solar industry, while enabling blue skies elsewhere, is leaving behind a scarred landscape at home.
So far, the environment has been the biggest loser in China’s rapid economic growth. The irony of the recent Post exposé is that the environment is not even being considered seriously by those Chinese industries that bear a “green” tag, and whose products support progress toward a better environment. As China becomes more industrialized and strives to meet the insatiable demands of a burgeoning urban middle class, there is every reason to question how long the current state of affairs can last, and how much time it will take before businesses care enough about their impacts to truly protect the environment.
Yingling Liu is manager of the China Program at the Worldwatch Institute, a Washington-D.C. based environmental research organization.
3. This article shows that environmental issues are closely related to politics. In fact ozone standards have to be restrictive to prevent air pollutions. However in this case, EPA's attempt to make stricter standards fell through because of the political influence. I assume that it would be also correlated with large companies. Stricter standards would make companies less beneficial. The close relation among environment, politics and economy can be seen through this article.
-----------------------------------
President favors politics and polluters over science and public welfare
On March 13, 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency set new ozone standards that place stricter limits on the release of smog-producing air pollutants that can cause serious health effects and even premature death. But under last-minute pressure from the White House, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson made the standards significantly less restrictive than those recommended by the agency’s scientific advisers. The White House also instructed the EPA to remove a separate standard designed to protect forests, land, soil, and crops from ozone air pollution. Research indicates that current ozone levels lead to dramatic reductions in plant and forest growth and cause adverse effects on overall ecosystem health. The EPA itself attests that ozone harms crop production and native ecosystems “more than any other air pollutant.”
Was White House Action Illegal? According to documents released by the EPA, agency officials initially planned to set one ozone standard to protect "public health" and a lower seasonal limit to protect "public welfare" (forests, farmland, wildlife, etc.), as required under the Clean Air Act, but Bush overruled them.
He ordered the EPA to increase the lower limit and to set only one standard that would apply to both public health and public welfare. "It is unprecedented and an unlawful act of political interference for the president personally to override a decision that the Clean Air Act leaves exclusively to EPA's expert scientific judgment," said John Walke, clean-air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The president's order sent administration officials scrambling to rewrite the regulations to avoid a conflict with past EPA statements on the harm caused by ozone and to prepare legal justifications for the weaker standard.
“For generations, a time-tested commitment to science and law has protected America’s health and environment,” said Vickie Patton, deputy general counsel for Environmental Defense Fund and a former attorney for the EPA General Counsel’s office. “The White House today cast aside science and law to impose its will upon EPA, leaving America’s health and environment behind.”
Here are the basics of the new ozone standard:
The EPA tightened the ozone standard from 80 parts per billion (ppb) to 75 ppb. The agency estimates that by 2020 the new standard will prevent at least 820 deaths, 1,400 heart attacks, 1,890 emergency room visits for asthma, and 610,000 lost school days annually.
By constrast, the EPA’s independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee unanimously recommended a more restrictive standard of 60 ppb to 70 ppb. The EPA estimates that by 2020 an ozone health standard of 65 ppb—the midpoint of the recommended range—would prevent at least 2,330 deaths, 4,000 heart attacks, 4,600 emergency room visits for asthma, and 1,300,000 lost school days annually. The EPA's Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee and many public health advocates lobbied for the 60 ppb limit because children are more vulnerable to air pollution. "Smog doesn't just ruin your view; it poses serious health risks, especially to children and senior citizens,” said Ed Hopkins, director of the Sierra Club's Environmental Quality Program. “Study after study shows that to protect public health we need to significantly lower the amount of smog in our air. EPA's new smog standard does not go far enough to protect public health. We know that smog can still cause serious harm at levels below this standard. "Almost half of all Americans live in areas with unsafe levels of smog, yet the EPA has failed to take appropriate protective action,” Hopkins said. “It has ignored the advice of the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association and even the unanimous recommendation of its own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Once again the EPA has put industry before public health, and our communities will pay the price.”
What Does the Clean Air Act Require?
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review the science related to ground-level ozone and other air quality issues every five years and determine whether national air standards should be adjusted to bring them in line with new findings. The agency last revised national ozone standards in 1997. The EPA missed its deadline for reviewing the ozone standards, which prompted a lawsuit by the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense Fund, Earthjustice and other groups concerned about clean air. The EPA decision announced on March 13 was required as part of a court-ordered settlement.
The Clean Air Act requires one standard for protecting public health and a separate one for protecting public welfare, which includes “effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-made materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and climate, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards to transportation, as well as effects on economic values and on personal comfort and well-being.”
White House Intervenes to Direct EPA Decision
In a March 6 memo, Susan E. Dudley of the Office of Management and Budget pressured EPA staff to abandon the secondary standard for public welfare, in part because of the potential costs. Marcus C. Peacock of the EPA replied to Dudley’s memo the next day, saying that “EPA cannot consider costs in setting a secondary standard.”
Peacock’s position was not based on some arbitrary internal EPA policy. The Clean Air Act states very clearly that the nation must set clean air standards based on science alone. Furthermore, a unanimous Supreme Court decision in 2001, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, held that national air quality standards are to be based solely on science, consistent with 30 years of successful implementation of the Clean Air Act.
When the EPA stood firm for science, the matter was referred to President Bush, and on March 11 the president intervened directly to settle the dispute by ordering that the secondary standard to protect public welfare should be identical to the new primary standard for public health.
The EPA estimates that it will cost polluting industries $7.6 billion to $8.8 billion a year to meet the 75-ppb standard, but that the rule will yield $2 billion to $19 billion in health benefits.
2. Salmon collapse in California could lead to Pacific fishing ban; feds take first step
3. We’ve talking about ‘Good’ example about sustainable fishery in last class, this article about somewhat different example in American fishery now going on. There are many ways to deal with this issue. We are already covered that centralized policy by government is not always better decentralized and independent policy of local community. Many Korean coastal communities on the west, east and south sea also have seen declines and changes in their fishery, caused by many uncertain factors such as unusual weather pattern, oil-split accident and so on. How can we solve these problems? I agree people as human being are not only economically rational, but also politically rational and can do make organization through accepted ways. This kind of problems can be solved by harmonized process between public sector and private sector. Added to this, most important thing on this kind of process is ‘predict & prepare’ not treat after disaster.
----------------------------------- (The Associated Press, Saturday, March 15, 2008) SACRAMENTO, Calif. : Federal fisheries managers took the first step Friday toward imposing what could be the strictest limits ever on West Coast salmon fishing amid a collapse of the central California chinook salmon fishery.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council unanimously adopted three options for sport and commercial fishing off the Pacific Coast, including an unprecedented complete shutdown of fishing off California and Oregon.
"This is a major disaster. We've never had one ever like this," council chairman Donald Hansen said after the vote. "It will have a major impact on California commercial fisheries for salmon, recreational fisheries, California charters."
The closest the council has come to halting all salmon fishing was 2006, when a decline in Northern California's Klamath River run forced severe restrictions on the number of fish caught.
The other options are severely limiting fishing, or hiring fisherman to catch and release salmon for scientific projects. Both those options would require the federal government to grant an emergency rule because the salmon numbers are so low.
The fishery council is expected to decide which action to take in April during its meeting in Seattle.
"I think the likeliest outcome this year is no one will put a hook in the water," said Humboldt County fisherman Dave Bitts, who was attending the weeklong meeting in Sacramento.
The Sacramento River chinook run is usually one of the most plentiful on the West Coast, providing the bulk of the fish caught by commercial trollers off California and Oregon.
But this year's returns even with no fishing allowed are expected to reach less than half the council's goal for spawning a new generation. It marks the third straight year of declines, and the outlook for next year is no better.
After years of declining salmon runs, few fishermen rely solely on salmon for a living.
Supplies of farm-raised fish and sockeye from Alaska are expected to remain plentiful in supermarkets and restaurants, but there will be few chinook. Also known as king salmon, they are the type of salmon most prized by chefs and sportsmen.
Many coastal communities that still have salmon fleets have yet to recover from long-standing downturns in fishing and timber.
"It's going to have a big effect on our coastal communities," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the San Francisco-based Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations.
It is the third straight year of hardship. In 2006, the season was curtailed to protect struggling chinook returns to the Klamath River in northern California. Last year, catches were poor despite a relatively open fishing season.
Congress authorized some aid for fishermen after the 2006 seasons, and California representatives are looking for more this year.
The council's action on Friday prompted Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the governors of Oregon and Washington to urge the federal government to declare a resource disaster if the fisheries are closed or severely restricted. Such a declaration would make communities eligible for federal aid.
Closing fisheries in California and most of Oregon also could lead to higher salmon prices for restaurants and consumers who would be forced to buy Alaska-caught salmon instead of locally caught fish. In most years, about 90 percent of wild chinook salmon caught off the California coast originate in the Sacramento River and its tributaries. Only about 90,000 adult salmon returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries to spawn last year, the second lowest number on record and well below the government's conservation goals, according to federal fishery regulators. That's down from 277,000 in 2006 and a record high of 804,000 in 2002. Biologists predict this year's salmon returns could be even lower because the number of returning young male fish, known as "jacks," hit an all-time low last year. Only about 2,000 of them were recorded, which is far below the 40,000 counted in a typical year. Other West Coast rivers also have seen declines in their salmon runs, though not as steep as California's Central Valley. Experts are uncertain about what caused the collapse, pointing to dozens of factors. Marine scientists blame an unusual weather pattern that triggered a collapse of the marine food web in 2005, the year most of this year's returning adults were entering the ocean as juveniles. Fishermen, environmental groups and American Indians largely blame the salmon's troubles on poor water quality and water diversions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. (Associated Press Writer Jeff Barnard in Grants Pass, Ore., contributed to this report.)
*** On the Net: Pacific Fishery Management Council: http://www.pcouncil.org National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nmfs.gov --------- http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/15/america/Disappearing-Salmon.php?page=1
1. Keonhwa Sung 2. Recycling Of E-waste In China May Expose Mothers, Infants To High Dioxin Levels 3. The reason we have recycled waste is to save our environment. However, it happens unexpected results; "Chinese recycling methods significantly increase dioxin levels in women and their breast-fed infants." Based on this case, we have to consider how to recycle waste as well as recycling waste. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Recycling Of E-waste In China May Expose Mothers, Infants To High Dioxin Levels ScienceDaily (Oct. 23, 2007) — With China now the destination for 70 percent of the computers, TVs, cell phones, and other electronic waste (e-waste) recycled worldwide each year, a new study has concluded that Chinese recycling methods significantly increase dioxin levels in women and their breast-fed infants.
Ming H. Wong and colleagues did one of what they describe as "very few" studies of dioxin levels among women of child bearing age at an e-waste recycling site, and compared those levels to women in an area without e-waste recycling.
They analyzed levels of dioxins - compounds linked to cancer, developmental defects, and other health problems - in samples of breast milk, placenta, and hair.
Samples from the e-waste site showed significantly higher levels of dioxins than those taken at the reference site. Researchers estimated that the daily intake of infants from 6 months of breast feeding at the recycling site was more than double that of the reference site.
Therefore, this implies that these levels at the recycling site and the reference site were at least 25 times and 11 times higher, respectively, than the World Health Organization tolerable daily limit for adults regarding dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.
The study includes descriptions of recycling methods, which include heating scrap electronic components over coal fires in the open air.
The study "Body Loadings and Health Risk Assessment of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans at an Intensive Electronic Waste Recycling Site in China" is scheduled for the Nov. 15 issue of ACS' Environmental Science & Technology,. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071022094520.htm
Sudan Villagers Suffer Severe Water Contamination Caused by Oil Boom.
On March 6th 2008, according to OPEC(Organiztion of Petroleum Exporting Countries), oil prices hit a new record of $104.52 a barrel, first time ever in history.
The need for oil is rocketing father more than the quantity available and this has resulted in a demanding for new oil industries to drill more and more in countries where people are suffering for the damages caused by these desires.
Sudan villagers count for only one example where the sacrifice for hardcore oil desires from developed states, hurt those who are exploited from the oil boom. The Sudan villagers shouldn't be sacrificed for the lusts of oil industries in extracting oil without consent.
As we have learned so far in class, there are numerous causes of ocean pollution not only is it due to the oil boom, but the various needs of our lives have made nature beg for their saviour.
-----------------------------
[Sudan villagers, environment suffer from oil boom]
by Bogonko Bosire Tue Mar 4, 10:13 AM ET
RIER, Sudan (AFP) - Kicked out of sleepy Nile fishing hamlets lost forever to Sudan's oil boom, villagers in the south curse a refinery for causing forced relocations, for spreading disease and ravaging the environment.
Activists also warn that the 2006 arrival of White Nile Petroleum Company (WNPOC), a consortium led by Malaysia's Petronas, in Unity State threatens the Sudd wetlands, the world's largest maze of swamps, lagoons and tributaries.
Villagers say thousands were forcefully evicted to make way for a low-sulphur crude oil venture in south-central Sudan. They say they lost venerated ancestral homes, died from contamination and saw livelihoods jeopardised.
"Since 2006, 27 adults and three children have died because of contaminated water from the oil field," said Paul Bol Ruoth, county commissioner in Koch, about 70 kilometres (44 miles) from Bentiu, the state capital.
The oil firm has not been reachable for comment on the allegations.
But more than 1,000 people are now sick with unknown illnesses and among the fatalities, only three have been compensated by WNPOC, local officials said.
Despite US-led sanctions to push Sudan to resolve the bloody war in Darfur, direct foreign investment in Sudan soared to 2.3 billion dollars in 2006, fueled by energy-hungry Asian economies led by China and Malaysia, just seven years after the country began exporting crude oil.
"The company (WNPOC) has no right. It's our people who have the right over their land because they need it for grazing and clean water," said Ruoth.
Deluged by a barrage of complaints from hapless villagers whose lives were already fractured by decades of civil war, he led a delegation in mid-February to assess the toll on the environment from the oil refinery.
"Since water is contaminated, we have lost several cows and goats," said an elder from the Nuer ethnic group, too fearful to give his name when talking to reporters on a visit to the area.
"We need help," he said, staring hopelessly at plumes of smoke from the Thar Jath oil refinery, named after the former village evacuated to make way for the complex and sitting in the heart of the partly drained Sudd swamp.
Villagers may be mesmerised by new roads and electricity cables, but they have seen little tangible improvement to their squalid lifestyle.
Now they are furious at the prospect of swanky hotels and malls in the swampy heartland, where government troops and and ex-southern rebels pounded once each other with high explosives in the 21-year-old civil war.
"We do not care about the new development they promised us. All we need is our old, clean environment," said unemployed Peter Riek Gieng, 25, who worked as a casual labourer to help build the refinery.
When oil is extracted, large amounts of saline water, or brine, are injected into the sub-surface to maintain the pressure of oil reservoirs, which enhances oil recovery, said human rights and Christian aid group Sign of Hope.
Sample results seen by AFP indicated that brine from the refinery produced a high salinity, putting the concentration of nitrate at 81.6 mg/l, well above the 10 mg/l recommended by the the US Environmental Protection Agency.
"A nitrate concentration amounting to 81.6 mg/l can have serious effects especially on young children," said Sign of Hope in a statement.
"Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate in this dose could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may die," it said.
The head of the organisation, Reimund Reubelt, called on the authorities to act now to prevent an ecological catastrophe.
"We also see a looming ecological catastrophe for the largest swamplands of the world. To secure public health the government must now improve the quality of drinking water dramatically and at the same time prevent an ecological catastrophe," he added.
At Riek village, where local residents were relocated to make way for the Thar Jath refinery about 6.5 kilometres (four miles) away, children play around a bore-hole abandoned as a source of water for health concerns.
One oil employee, who requested to remain unnamed, told journalists that he witnessed oil workers dumping industrial waste into a nearby isolated pit in a dried swamp, which will flood in the rainy season.
"I usually see men in aprons dig up huge pits and dump toxic wastes. They do not let anybody near that area," he said.
But aid workers complain that the administration in southern Sudan is reluctant to address the issue since officials are profiting from oil wealth.
Some villagers promised a Nigeria-like struggle on oil companies.
"If the government ignores, us we will go Nigeria style," said Martin Luang, a rugged middle-aged villager alluding to the wave of kidnappings of oil workers and relations of prominent Nigerians in the restive Niger Delta.
Sudan's oil production is estimated to reach between 500,000 and 600,000 barrels per day this year, but output is expected to rise in coming years and the boom in exploration is mainly in the southern region.
Although the north-south Sudan civil war ended with a peace agreement in 2005, both sides still bicker over shares of oil revenue.
2. Unique ecosystem of the DMZ under threat due to the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex
3. I am very interested in this region(DMZ) so i want to introduce this article. This article is from the Green Korea United(녹색연합), and shows that the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex in the north korea pollute the demilitarised zone (DMZ), which has to be one of the most inaptly named places in the world for there is a heavier concentration of military personnel here than perhaps anywhere else on the planet.
-------------------------------
date : 2007.09.30 13:25
Soyoung You
- No environmental effect evaluation step included in the process of developing a large-scale industrial complex. - New regulation allows BOD of 30mg/l on the clear water with BOD 0.1mg/l
Gaeseong Industrial Complex, a symbol of reconciliation between the two Koreas, is projected to seriously contaminate the ecosystem of the DMZ as well as Sacheon and Imjin River. After analyzing the ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex environmental protection plan,’ (co-written by Korea Land Corporation and Hyundai Asan corp.) and ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex waster water plan report,’ Green Korea United (GKU) concluded that the currently installed terminal wastewater treatment facilities are not capable of purifying indissoluble and other heavy metal contaminants.
In addition, the BOD standard that has been suggested as the discharge standard is set at least 30 times higher than the current Sacheon water quality, which would lead to unavoidablecontamination of the wetlands of the western part of the DMZ, Sacheon, Imjin River and the estuary of the Han River, the only region in South Korea where nature is preserved as it is due to the region’s inaccessibility rising from political situation. Gaeseong Industrial Complex, the two Koreas’ joint project, plans to develop heavy and chemical industrial and industrial engineering complex of area 65.7km2 and population half a million and the first construction stage of area 3.28km2 is in progress currently.
Large scale development planunder progress without environmental effect evaluation. Because of thespecial status of the South and North Economic Cooperation in Korea, a large scale development is currently in progress without the pre-construction environmental examination and environmental effect evaluation procedures to minimize the project’s environmental impacts. This is due to the virtual absence of legislative and institutional regulations regarding the environmental impacts of the South-North Economic Cooperation in Korea.
Current terminal wastewater treatmentfacilities incapable of purifying wastewater’s heavy metal and indissoluble materials.
One of the most prominent aspects of Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s environmental problem is the degradation of water quality. A significant number of businesses involved such as fiber, dyeing and leather enterprises release excessive amount of contaminants. Wastewater from assembling metal products also contain toxic materials such as heavy metal and cyanogens. Although the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex development plan’s terminal wastewater treatment facilities are scheduled to begin purifying 15,000 ton of wastewater from July, the treatment plans for wastewater from dyeing factories, leather and metal gilding industries have been excluded, which shifts the responsibility of purifying the metallic and indissoluble material on occupant businesses, as the Korea regulation states.
Nevertheless, it is not only difficult for incoming business enterprises that come to Gaeseong Industrial Complex for inexpensive production costs to spend enough funds for adequate treatment equipments, but the probability of their supplying funds for huge costs of transportation for chemicals released during the entire purifying process is also low. Thus, there is a high probability that metallic and indissoluble materials will be released after simple dilution, instead of being purified thoroughly.
Contamination of Sacheon Rive due to the wastewater treatment plant’s discharge quality and discharge quantity are self-evident.
The core problem of wastewater discharge lies on the quality standards of the discharged water and the quantity of the discharged water. Before the construction of the industrial complex, the water quality of Sacheon River where all the discharged water flow into was between BOD 0.1~1.0mg/l, which has earned it the prime I a class under South Korea’s stream water quality standard.
However, the new wastewater treatment facilities’ discharge water quality standard that incoming businesses in charge of maintaining environmental quality proposed and the two Koreas agreed upon allows BOD of up to 30mg/l. Allowing discharge of 30mg/l of wastewater will lead to 30~300times of BOD contamination on pure Sacheon River. In addition, although the measured flux of Sacheon River, which is the only stream where wastewater can be discharged, is 2.3m3/sec, the inflowing discharge quantity from the wastewater treatment plant from the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex is 0.35m3/sec, which constitutes 15% of Sacheon River’s total discharge quantity.
Because of such large amount and high concentration of discharged water, even the first stage of the development of Gaeseong Industrial Complex will have a serious impact on the streams, and the validity of the project regarding the entire 65.7km2 of Industrial Complex will need to be reexamined.
Damage done to the wetlands of the DMZ due to the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex inevitable. The water quality problem of Gaeseong Industrial Complex does not end with Sacheon River. The water system of Gaeseong Industrial Complex flows from Sambong Creek-Sacheon River-Imjin River- Han River estuary to Northern Kyunggi Bay. Regions around Sacheon River, which has been free from human interference for 54 years, is an international ecological treasure house which penetrates the DMZ’s western wetlands. In addition, Imjin River and Han River are water sources indispensable to Kyunggi Province and north-western regions of the Great Seoul Area. The heart of the problem lies at the fact that Sacheon River is the only stream that receives Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s discharged wastewater.
Thus, when pollutants are released from Gaeseong Industrial Complex, contamination of all water systems from Sacheon River, Imjin River through to northern Kyunggi Bay is inevitable. This means destruction of ecological systems in the western wetlands of the DMZ and will also influence the fishing industry around Kanghwa Island area. The seriousness of the problem arises from the fact that once polluted, the recovery of the DMZ, Imjin River and the joint waters of the northern Kyunggi bay is impossible due to the anti-personnel mine problems and political sensitivity.
The government’s ambiguous stance towards the DMZ. Conservation of the DMZ is in international interest, as the DMZ is the only wetlands in the world’s temperate region that developed for half a century free from human interference. Former President Daejoong Kim and President Roh also valued the DMZ’s unique and rich ecosystem and suggested a special kind of conservation policies to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry has already declared the DMZ as ‘natural reservation area’ under the Natural Environment Conservation Act and Kangwon Province and Kyunggi Province are already publicizing and commercializing the DMZ area.
Nevertheless, closer examination of the actual conservation activities around the DMZ and the Civilian Passage Restriction Line reveals that although the DMZ ‘s western wetlands of international worth is facing a threat of destruction, Ministry of Environment, which holds the primary responsibility and Ministry of National Unification, which is leading the conservation projects, have remained indifferent towards the situation. Neglecting these current pollution problems has high potential of inciting further social controversy in the future and this will have a negative influence on the the South and North Cooperation.
Gaeseong Industrial Complex should prioritize ecological conservation of the DMZ and the Korean peninsula. -Gaeseong Industrial Complex currently uses the emission allowance standards of the environmental protection plan that enterprise partners Hyundai Asan corp. and Korea Land Corporation drafted and the two Koreas agreed upon. Under the abnormal operating system where the environmental overseer accepts the proposed standards of the business enterprises that should be the subjects of environmental regulations, the conservational value of the DMZ is not being considered at all. In order to conserve the DMZ and minimize environmental pollution, GKU sees following implantation as being necessary:
-Development of strict standards for the water quality of the discharged water from the terminal wastewater treatment facilities.
-Governmental aid for the operating and maintenance costs of the purifying processes and the smooth operation of wastewater treatment facilities
-Execution of environmental effect evaluation of the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and Sacheon River region that exceeds or is equal to domestic standards.
-Development of a detailed plan for long term monitoring of the contaminant releases from the incoming businesses.
In the long term, the government and business enterprises should block environmental degradation arising from economic developments that disregard the environmental impacts and minimize the negative environmental degradation in North Korea. In conclusion, the government should adopt policies to conserve North Korea’s environment and to guarantee sustainable development of the two Koreas.
title: Unique ecosystem of the DMZ under threat due to the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex
This is an article from the Green Korea United(녹색연합)and shows that the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North korea pollute the demilitarised zone (DMZ), which has to be one of the most inaptly named places in the world for there is a heavier concentration of military personnel here than perhaps anywhere else on the planet.
Maybe people think that this region is untouched and well preserved because people are restricted to enter. However, it is not ok because of its political and economical reason. So, I want to introduce this article.
----------------------------
Soyoung You
- No environmental effect evaluation step included in the process of developing a large-scale industrial complex. - New regulation allows BOD of 30mg/l on the clear water with BOD 0.1mg/l
Gaeseong Industrial Complex, a symbol of reconciliation between the two Koreas, is projected to seriously contaminate the ecosystem of the DMZ as well as Sacheon and Imjin River. After analyzing the ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex environmental protection plan,’ (co-written by Korea Land Corporation and Hyundai Asan corp.) and ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex waster water plan report,’ Green Korea United (GKU) concluded that the currently installed terminal wastewater treatment facilities are not capable of purifying indissoluble and other heavy metal contaminants.
In addition, the BOD standard that has been suggested as the discharge standard is set at least 30 times higher than the current Sacheon water quality, which would lead to unavoidablecontamination of the wetlands of the western part of the DMZ, Sacheon, Imjin River and the estuary of the Han River, the only region in South Korea where nature is preserved as it is due to the region’s inaccessibility rising from political situation. Gaeseong Industrial Complex, the two Koreas’ joint project, plans to develop heavy and chemical industrial and industrial engineering complex of area 65.7km2 and population half a million and the first construction stage of area 3.28km2 is in progress currently.
Large scale development planunder progress without environmental effect evaluation. Because of thespecial status of the South and North Economic Cooperation in Korea, a large scale development is currently in progress without the pre-construction environmental examination and environmental effect evaluation procedures to minimize the project’s environmental impacts. This is due to the virtual absence of legislative and institutional regulations regarding the environmental impacts of the South-North Economic Cooperation in Korea.
Current terminal wastewater treatmentfacilities incapable of purifying wastewater’s heavy metal and indissoluble materials.
One of the most prominent aspects of Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s environmental problem is the degradation of water quality. A significant number of businesses involved such as fiber, dyeing and leather enterprises release excessive amount of contaminants. Wastewater from assembling metal products also contain toxic materials such as heavy metal and cyanogens. Although the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex development plan’s terminal wastewater treatment facilities are scheduled to begin purifying 15,000 ton of wastewater from July, the treatment plans for wastewater from dyeing factories, leather and metal gilding industries have been excluded, which shifts the responsibility of purifying the metallic and indissoluble material on occupant businesses, as the Korea regulation states.
Nevertheless, it is not only difficult for incoming business enterprises that come to Gaeseong Industrial Complex for inexpensive production costs to spend enough funds for adequate treatment equipments, but the probability of their supplying funds for huge costs of transportation for chemicals released during the entire purifying process is also low. Thus, there is a high probability that metallic and indissoluble materials will be released after simple dilution, instead of being purified thoroughly.
Contamination of Sacheon Rive due to the wastewater treatment plant’s discharge quality and discharge quantity are self-evident.
The core problem of wastewater discharge lies on the quality standards of the discharged water and the quantity of the discharged water. Before the construction of the industrial complex, the water quality of Sacheon River where all the discharged water flow into was between BOD 0.1~1.0mg/l, which has earned it the prime I a class under South Korea’s stream water quality standard.
However, the new wastewater treatment facilities’ discharge water quality standard that incoming businesses in charge of maintaining environmental quality proposed and the two Koreas agreed upon allows BOD of up to 30mg/l. Allowing discharge of 30mg/l of wastewater will lead to 30~300times of BOD contamination on pure Sacheon River. In addition, although the measured flux of Sacheon River, which is the only stream where wastewater can be discharged, is 2.3m3/sec, the inflowing discharge quantity from the wastewater treatment plant from the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex is 0.35m3/sec, which constitutes 15% of Sacheon River’s total discharge quantity.
Because of such large amount and high concentration of discharged water, even the first stage of the development of Gaeseong Industrial Complex will have a serious impact on the streams, and the validity of the project regarding the entire 65.7km2 of Industrial Complex will need to be reexamined.
Damage done to the wetlands of the DMZ due to the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex inevitable. The water quality problem of Gaeseong Industrial Complex does not end with Sacheon River. The water system of Gaeseong Industrial Complex flows from Sambong Creek-Sacheon River-Imjin River- Han River estuary to Northern Kyunggi Bay. Regions around Sacheon River, which has been free from human interference for 54 years, is an international ecological treasure house which penetrates the DMZ’s western wetlands. In addition, Imjin River and Han River are water sources indispensable to Kyunggi Province and north-western regions of the Great Seoul Area. The heart of the problem lies at the fact that Sacheon River is the only stream that receives Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s discharged wastewater.
Thus, when pollutants are released from Gaeseong Industrial Complex, contamination of all water systems from Sacheon River, Imjin River through to northern Kyunggi Bay is inevitable. This means destruction of ecological systems in the western wetlands of the DMZ and will also influence the fishing industry around Kanghwa Island area. The seriousness of the problem arises from the fact that once polluted, the recovery of the DMZ, Imjin River and the joint waters of the northern Kyunggi bay is impossible due to the anti-personnel mine problems and political sensitivity.
The government’s ambiguous stance towards the DMZ. Conservation of the DMZ is in international interest, as the DMZ is the only wetlands in the world’s temperate region that developed for half a century free from human interference. Former President Daejoong Kim and President Roh also valued the DMZ’s unique and rich ecosystem and suggested a special kind of conservation policies to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry has already declared the DMZ as ‘natural reservation area’ under the Natural Environment Conservation Act and Kangwon Province and Kyunggi Province are already publicizing and commercializing the DMZ area.
Nevertheless, closer examination of the actual conservation activities around the DMZ and the Civilian Passage Restriction Line reveals that although the DMZ ‘s western wetlands of international worth is facing a threat of destruction, Ministry of Environment, which holds the primary responsibility and Ministry of National Unification, which is leading the conservation projects, have remained indifferent towards the situation. Neglecting these current pollution problems has high potential of inciting further social controversy in the future and this will have a negative influence on the the South and North Cooperation.
Gaeseong Industrial Complex should prioritize ecological conservation of the DMZ and the Korean peninsula. -Gaeseong Industrial Complex currently uses the emission allowance standards of the environmental protection plan that enterprise partners Hyundai Asan corp. and Korea Land Corporation drafted and the two Koreas agreed upon. Under the abnormal operating system where the environmental overseer accepts the proposed standards of the business enterprises that should be the subjects of environmental regulations, the conservational value of the DMZ is not being considered at all. In order to conserve the DMZ and minimize environmental pollution, GKU sees following implantation as being necessary:
-Development of strict standards for the water quality of the discharged water from the terminal wastewater treatment facilities.
-Governmental aid for the operating and maintenance costs of the purifying processes and the smooth operation of wastewater treatment facilities
-Execution of environmental effect evaluation of the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and Sacheon River region that exceeds or is equal to domestic standards.
-Development of a detailed plan for long term monitoring of the contaminant releases from the incoming businesses.
In the long term, the government and business enterprises should block environmental degradation arising from economic developments that disregard the environmental impacts and minimize the negative environmental degradation in North Korea. In conclusion, the government should adopt policies to conserve North Korea’s environment and to guarantee sustainable development of the two Koreas.
A very down to earth* kind of guy. I'm an environmental sociologist interested in establishing material and organizational sustainability worldwide. I'm always looking for interesting materials/technologies, inspiring ideas, or institutional examples of sustainability to inspire others to recognize their choices now. To be fatalistic about an unsustainable world is a sign of a captive mind, given all our options.
*(If "earth" is defined in a planetary sense, concerning comparative historical knowledge and interest in the past 10,000 years or so anywhere...) See both blogs.
15 comments:
Gowoon JUNG
Title: what I want to make clear understanding in the lobster case
Yesterday's class was very interesting with the Ostrom's framework and lobster case, but I am confused with some ideas. As far as I understood in Ostrom's case, we can assume that there is a hope in preventing envrionmental degradation because of "Political decision'. Each people only can be economically rational and act for their own benefits. However, when they work together as an organization, their is another power to act , and they can think about their envionment and how their actions will influence to society and environments. So, I thoutht that the assumption of Ostrom's framework towards human nature is positive perspective.
However, in the lobster case, I can not agree (or understand)that this case shows the priciples and assumptions of her framworks well. Of course, It really shows how the political dynamics and all lobbies made the laws(norms) become more friendly to environment, especially to lobsters. However, I think all the lobbies to local governments and struggles between canners and fresh lobster dealers are just accomplished for their own profits and benefits. Even though they (canners and fresh lobster dealers) tried to make laws be useful to themselves, the other factors such as the special physical traits of lobsters make it possible for lobsters to be conserved in their position.
I can not catch the meanings of the political/Institutional power framework in ostrom's theory. I am not sure I did understand the Ostrom's framework exactly. Frankly speaking, I could not understand or connect exactly the 8 traits of her framework with lobster case.
I hope to get your answers about it.
My another question: I am not sure it is ok to leave my comments about the article and lecture which we studied in class. Next time, I will try to convey new and hot news of environments.
ok. then see you next time^^
1. Min Sook Kim
2. China Bans the Use of Plastic Bags
3. China never stops surprising the world! While New York, the most advanced city in the world was considering, China, a less developed nation declared to ban plastic bags and showed the world how seriously it concerned about pollution. One of the advantages of the communist national country seems to be able to make decisions and take actions quicker, if it’s for the better.
-----------------------------------
China announced this week that production and use of plastic bags in supermarkets and retail shops will be banned beginning June 1. This new law could have a considerably positive environmental impact, given that Chinese citizens "use as many as 3 billion plastic bags a day." The law is part of a larger campaign to fight "white pollution" in China, which includes other forms of rampant plastic and styrofoam use as well.
This bold and surprising move demonstrates that the Chinese government is starting to take pollution concerns seriously. While a few city governments here in the U.S. have passed (San Francisco) or are considering passing similar legislation (New York), it is refreshing to see a national government as powerful and influential as the China make such a decision.
So, how will plastics manufacturers, retailers, and citizens react? Anecdotal comments from the AP story show that citizens and retailers welcome the move. Sturdier plastic bags will continue to be available and the manufacturing of cloth bags can be expected to rise. In addition, Reuters reported that the Chinese government "signaled it may tweak the tax code to give the recycling industry a boost."
Could this law trigger similar laws from other national governments? How could this work in the U.S.? I invite readers from the San Francisco region to comment on the effectiveness of plastic ban regulation in their city.
---------
http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/29017/
1. Gowoon JUNG
2. Title: China Struggles to Balance Economy with Environment
3. China struggles with very sensitive concers. It means the choice of priority between economy and environment. However, it is not easy matter to decide. Every developing countries hope to make economy bloom, but there is also a pressure of the world for maintaing the state of environment. The developing countries argue that there is hidden politics which makes countries not to develop and growth economically.
Yes, so I think this chemical spilt accident and all reactions of the world shows the hot interests toward environment. However, it is really hard to understand and make a sollution when the matters is connected with politics between peoples.
----------------------------
In its rush to modernize, China is struggling to balance the demands of a booming economy with growing environmental concerns. This struggle recently erupted onto front pages around the world after a chemical explosion poisoned a major waterway.
An explosion last month at a chemical factory in Jilin, a city in northeastern China, released about 100 tons of toxic chemicals, including cancer causing benzene, into the Songhua River.
The chemical slick has traveled downriver towards Russia and threatens to poison the water supply of ten million.
In the Chinese city of Harbin, a city of 3.8 million people about 250 miles from the accident, the water supply has been shut off and people wait in long lines to receive water sent in from neighboring regions.
"We are now frugal with water," a woman from Harbin tells Salon. "First we use it to clean vegetables, then to wash our hands, and finally to flush the toilet."
The Songhua River in China flows into the Heilong River which becomes the Amur River in Russia.
Officials expect the chemicals to arrive in the Russian city of Khabarovsk by Dec. 10 or 11.
The Russian Far East city of 580,000 is bracing for water shortages and even heat shortages, as the city uses a centralized heating system in which hot water is piped through radiators.
Many don't trust that their government will protect them. Some liken the event to when the Chernobyl Nuclear plant exploded in Ukraine in 1986, once part of the former Soviet Union. It is considered the worst nuclear accident in history. The Soviet government was accused of trying to cover up the accident which ended up killing some 50 people and exposing thousands to harmful radiation.
Reading and Discussion Questions
"People remember Chernobyl, when the government didn't say anything for days or warn residents," regional government spokeswoman Natalya Zimina told the Associated Press.
The United States has announced that it is sending experts to help China cope with the toxic spill as it reaches the Russian border.
After initially trying to downplay the environmental disaster by sending in water trucks covered with banners proclaiming how well the government is treating the people, Chinese officials are now admitting that some in the government acted improperly.
The country's chief environmental official, Xie Zhenhua, quit his post Friday and accepted responsibility for the spill.
Complicating the matter, Xie's chief deputy Wang Yuqing said local Jilin officials initially failed to report the factory accident, which prevented the spill from being better controlled, the China Daily reported.
Some regional leaders gave "tacit consent to the discharge of pollutants into rivers in the pursuit of economic growth," Wang said.
However, no local officials have yet to be punished and Xie remains a member of the Communist Party's Central Committee - the inner circle that controls much of the nation's political power.
China's economy is growing rapidly following market reforms that allowed a shift from pure communist market ideas to a blend of more socialist and capitalist market ideas.
But that growth has impacted negatively on the environment and the safety of workers. According to official statistics, 350 Chinese die daily in industrial accidents. But the true number may be much higher.
An explosion at a state-owned coal mine in Qitaihe, in northeastern China, killed 171 miners in late November.
In response to the latest blast, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao criticized the coal industry.
"The various safety measures we've formulated haven't been really implemented, and many of them are no more than passed down or repeated orally," he said.
Despite government assurances that mine safety will improve, families of miners killed in Qitaihe are resigned that their dangerous life will continue.
"There's nothing we can do about it," former miner and the father of a killed miner told the Associated Press. "We need to work, and the work is dangerous. We need to get on with life."
As China's economy continues to expand at a record pace, the central government in Beijing must face the growing dangers its own success are posing to the nation's workers and environment.
-----------
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec05/toxic_12-07.html
Jee-Hyun SONG
Oceans becoming acidic
Throughtout the week, we've taken a close look at the oceans such as plastic pollutions in gyres and the fishery decline. This article is also about how the oceans are suffering, but in a different way.
Due to the increasing amount of CO2 emitted by factories, power plants and cars, more and more CO2 are absorbed by the sea water, making it more acidic. As a result, shells of marine organisms corrode that eventually may lead to the breakdown of the ecosystem.
I believe that this article can also be an example of 'hybridity'. The emission of the gas CO2 is one of the major global concerns regarding the environment. Politically, the subject has been discussed among nations to decrease the amount of the CO2. However, for economic benefits, it seems hard for them to reach the agreement or abide by the rules to restrict the amount of the emission of the CO2. Such conflict appears in the relationship between the government and individuals as well. In the meantime, our poor sea friends are crying out for support...snif snif..
-----------------------------------
By Jennifer S. Holland
National Geographic Staff
Tiny creatures near the base of the marine food chain lead perilous lives at best. Now they face a man-made threat. No, not global warming this time, though the root cause is the same. As the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) rises, it is not only heating the globe but also dissolving in ocean waters, turning them more acidic. For shell-building animals that can mean a corrosive, even deadly environment.
Oceans are a natural sink for CO2, already soaking up more than a quarter of what's released into the atmosphere. Today we're pumping out massive quantities—a surge that began more than a century ago as factories, power plants, and cars began devouring fossil fuels. By now the oceans are taking in 25 million tons a day of excess CO2, and it is starting to show. Already scientists have measured a rise in acidity of some 30 percent in surface waters, and they predict a 100 to 150 percent increase by the end of the century.
No ill effects have been documented so far in the open ocean, but the threat is clear. Absorbed by seawater, CO2 reacts to form carbonic acid, which turns the normally alkaline water more acidic. In the process, fewer carbonate ions are left floating around—and many marine organisms, including mollusks and corals, rely on carbonate from seawater to build their shells and other hard parts. Eventually, vital species will no longer be able to build or maintain their shells and skeletons.
Users of the mineral aragonite—a very soluble type of calcium carbonate—are especially vulnerable. They include tiny pteropod snails, which help feed commercially vital fish like salmon. Computer models predict that polar waters will turn hostile for pteropods within 50 years (cold water holds the most CO2, so it is already less shell-friendly). By 2100, habitat for many shelled species could shrink drastically, with impacts up the food chain. And as the acidification reaches the tropics, "it's a doomsday scenario for coral reefs," says Carnegie Institution oceanographer Ken Caldeira. If current trends continue, he predicts, reefs will one day survive only in walled-off, acid-controlled refuges.
Massive outbursts of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have acidified the oceans in the geologic past, but equilibrium returned as the oceans stored away excess CO2 in minerals on the seafloor. This time nature may be slow to heal. "Our emissions are huge compared with natural fluxes," Caldeira says. "If you could stop emissions and wait 10,000 years, natural processes would probably take care of most of it." These days we're simply dishing it out faster than the oceans can mop it up.
--------
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/print/2007/11/marine-miniatures/acid-threat-text
1. Hea joung Lee
2. Environmental pollution of Kosovo
3. I know that Kosovo is strife area. Kosovo independent from Ugoslabia.
But they fight Serbia and Albania. Kosovo's people suffer because of pollution as well as war. There are many mineral dioposit. But because of war the diposit is KosoVo is letting. So heavy metal suffer to Kosovo's people. Specially lead pollution is serious.
Environmental pollution is include many problem. There are disagreement of world, disagreement of nation, and disagreement of class.
How slove the Kosovo polution? Untill the war is end, we wait? Or does international ogernization should intervene?
---------
ln Kwangju scientific technology institute Kim Gyung Oong (environment engineering and professor) who is a ground pollution specialist the international environment laboratory chief from the last year world health organization (WHO) was different pattern and it was proposed. Investigates the heavy metal be imbrued actual condition of Kosovo which is a disputed area of Europe and it was a request which requests. From one sufferer village of the northern part city Mittlobbycar of Kosovo where the tension is amplified in nation discord of Albania total and Serbia total the innumerable difficulties house sibling. It came out from the WHO. It investigates a sufferer village environment the bedspread. Ethnic minority Albania humanity and justice 90% inside Serbia Fall in from Kosovo which lives Serbia taking count of crosses majority hold it is because is an area where it is only it does. Kosovo independence it lets and one time a discord the residents which are a neighborhood cousin are separated at several years two and they knead. The this region general fatigue it is sick recently in leaden be imbrued of worst. The Kim major general who enters to the Mitlobbycar stream all of a sudden was yellow in the situation which gets wider in close at hand. It means that the heavy metal powder pile of shallow hillock height to the stream here and there is exposed in defenselessness. Only the wind which when it holds it will blow and it was an attitude which will fly away. It writes the mask and swells up softly and the degree example bedspread where the wind which comes will be afraid. The wind blows once and the heavy metal powder which is let alone in the open air flies away with the neighborhood area in minute. Maximum victim children The maximum victim of leaden be imbrued should have fallen about 6000 where it dwells in this region name. To that place child wild middle unusually the height decease the child who is undersized is more the same age than. The children have and the lead which to the soil which it divides is goes mad and effect it hangs. The children who are exposed to the lead which is a heavy metal undergo the development disorder which is serious. Leaden be imbrued of the mitt lobby car house hour sufferer village came minimum 5.5 boats international standard than, the maximum 125 it conceives but to reveal with the high thing. This report comes to send to this month end WHO, with the fact that in countermeasure preparation of the international community it will be used with ground. Also the Kim major general holds this result and again as the plan toward Kosovo does.
총탄과 납가루가 춤추는 죽음의 지대로…
토양오염 전문가인 광주과학기술원 김경웅(환경공학과 교수) 국제환경연구소장은 지난해 세계보건기구(WHO)에서 색다른 제안을 받았다. 유럽의 분쟁지역인 코소보의 중금속 오염 실태를 조사해 달라는 요청이었다.
알바니아계와 세르비아계의 민족 갈등으로 긴장이 증폭되고 있는 코소보의 북부 도시 미트로비차의 한 난민촌에서 만난 집시 형제. 사진 제공 김경웅
잠시 망설임을 뒤로하고 김 소장은 1월 27일부터 2월 2일까지 전운이 감도는 현지를 다녀왔다. 그리고 이달 초 가장 오염이 심각한 코소보 북부 미트로비차 지역에서 가져온 토양 시료 분석을 끝냈다.
○ 세계 최악의 납 오염지대
“무슨 일로 오셨습니까?” “WHO에서 나왔습니다. 난민촌 환경을 조사하려고요.”
1월 27일 김 소장이 코소보로 들어가는 길은 시작부터 긴장감이 맴돌았다. 미트로비차 지역으로 가는 마지막 관문. 헬멧을 눌러쓰고 손에는 자동소총을 든 병사가 다가와 김 소장이 탄 지프를 멈춰 세웠다.
방문지인 미트로비차는 복잡한 이해관계에 얽혀 있다. 세르비아 내 소수민족 알바니아인의 90%가 모여 사는 코소보에서 세르비아계가 다수를 차지하는 유일한 지역이기 때문이다. 코소보 독립을 두고 한때는 이웃사촌이었던 주민들이 수년째 둘로 갈려 갈등을 빚고 있다. 최근 이 지역은 최악의 납 오염에 몸살을 앓고 있다.
미트로비차 시내에 들어선 김 소장은 눈앞에 벌어진 상황에 깜짝 놀랐다. 야트막한 야산 높이의 중금속 가루 더미가 시내 곳곳에 무방비 상태로 노출돼 있던 것이다. 언제든 바람만 불면 날아갈 태세였다.
“마스크를 써도 살랑살랑 불어오는 바람이 두려울 정도예요. 일단 바람이 불면 노천에 방치된 중금속 가루는 삽시간에 인근 지역으로 날아가죠.”
1990년대 유고연방이 해체되기 전만 해도 이 지역은 대표적인 광산지대로 손꼽혀 왔다. 그러나 연방 해체와 함께 관리가 소홀해지면서 중금속 가루가 노천에 그대로 방치된 것이다.
○ 최대 피해자는 집시 아이들
납 오염의 최대 피해자는 이 지역에 거주하는 6000여 명의 집시다. ‘떠도는 사람들’로 불리는 집시의 거주 환경은 1960년대 한국의 판자촌 수준에 머물러 있었다. 특히 집시 아이들은 중금속 오염에 무방비로 노출돼 있었다.
“그곳 아이들 중에는 유난히 또래보다 키가 작고 왜소한 아이가 많아요. 아이들이 갖고 노는 흙에 있는 납이 영향을 미친 겁니다.”
중금속인 납에 노출된 아이들은 심각한 발육 장애를 겪는다. 코와 피부를 파고드는 납 성분은 영양 상태가 좋지 않은 노약자에겐 치명적이다. 김 소장은 아이들이 놀 만한 놀이터와 골목 구석구석에서 토양 샘플을 채취하기로 했다. 김 교수가 한 집시 난민촌에서 가져와 분석한 토양의 납 오염도는 WHO가 정한 기준보다 100배나 높았다.
조사팀이 도시 안팎을 조사하는 동안 세르비아계와 알바니아계 주민들도 경계의 고삐를 늦추지 않았다.
“지역의 의사들은 극히 소수를 제외하고 심각성을 전혀 깨닫지 못하고 있었죠. 안정적인 생활을 하는 주민들만 상대하다 보니 모두 건강하다고 착각하고 있어요.”
이번 조사에 김 소장을 끌어들인 사람은 WHO 유럽사무소 환경보건센터에서 활동하고 있던 김록호 박사였다. 김 박사는 코소보를 다녀온 의사들을 통해 이 지역의 심각성을 익히 알고 있었다. 그는 서울 사당의원 원장으로 재직하던 1990년대 초 원진레이온에서 직업병 환자가 발생하자 진상 규명에 앞장서기도 했다. 그런 그의 눈에 수년째 동남아시아 곳곳에서 비소 오염 연구를 해오던 김 소장이 들어온 것은 우연이 아니다.
○ 사선 넘어 만든 보고서 3월 보고
김 소장은 지난해 비소 오염으로 심한 몸살을 앓고 있는 메콩 강 일대의 오염 지도를 완성했다. 지금도 김 소장은 납이나 카드뮴, 비소 같은 중금속에 오염된 지역이면 어디든 달려간다.
김 소장이 미트로비차에 머무는 동안 시료 채취는 4일간이나 계속됐다. 세르비아계와 알바니아계 주민 간에 언제 총격전이 일어날지 모르는 일촉즉발의 상황도 계속됐다.
이달 초 그 결과를 분석한 보고서에는 미트로비차의 참혹한 현실이 속속들이 적혀 있다. 미트로비차 집시 난민촌의 납 오염은 국제 기준보다 최소 5.5배, 최대 125배나 높은 것으로 밝혀졌다. 이 보고서는 이달 말 WHO에 보내져 국제사회의 대책 마련에 근거로 이용될 것으로 보인다. 김 소장도 이 결과를 들고 다시 코소보로 향할 예정이라고 한다. 이제는 진짜로 대책을 세워야 할 시점이기 때문이다.
박근태 동아사이언스 기자 kunta@donga.com
---
http://www.donga.com/fbin/output?sfrm=1&n=200803140066
1.Minha Lee
2. The Dirty Side of a “Green” Industry
3. China is trying to protect their environment by solar-cell industry. Although solar-cell product aims to make a better environment, it has left behind a toxic pollution in Chinese villages and farmlands. Environmental industry is only one of the most well-exported production in China. According to this article, I feel that environmental industry in China brings more serious pollution finally.
-----------------------------------
4. As people worldwide increasingly feel the heat of climate change, many are applauding the skyrocketing growth China’s fledging solar-cell industry. Solar power and other “green” technologies, by providing electricity from renewable energy sources like the sun and wind, create hope for a world free of coal-burning pollution and natural resource depletion. A recent Washington Post article, however, has revealed that China’s booming solar industry is not as green as one might expect. Many of the solar panels that now adorn European and American rooftops have left behind a legacy of toxic pollution in Chinese villages and farmlands.
The Post article describes how Luoyang Zhonggui, a major Chinese polysilicon manufacturer, is dumping toxic factory waste directly on to the lands of neighboring villages, killing crops and poisoning residents. Other polysilicon factories in the country have similar problems, either because they have not installed effective pollution control equipment or they are not operating these systems to full capacity. Polysilicon is a key component of the sunlight-capturing wafers used in solar photovoltaic (PV) cells.
China is now a global leader in solar PV manufacture. According to the recent Worldwatch Institute report Powering China’s Development: The Role of Renewable Energy, PV production capacity in China jumped from 350 megawatts (MW) in 2005 to over 1,000 MW in 2006, with 1,500 MW estimated for 2007. High-profile initial public stock offerings for several Chinese companies, some valued in the billions of dollars, have focused global attention on how this industry will progress—having literally developed from scratch into the world’s third largest PV industry in just five years. Most of this development, however, is driven by global demand, with over 90 percent of Chinese-made solar PV systems being exported to Europe, Japan, and the United States.
Technologies exist to recycle the chemical byproducts of solar-cell production, but some Chinese polysilicon plants, including Luoyang Zhonggui, are cutting costs and corners by avoiding significant extra investment in pollution control. The cheaper prices of their products, which do not currently factor in environmental costs, are projected to fan the rapid expansion of Chinese-made solar PV systems around the world, especially in industrial countries that can afford the still-expensive units.
Although China will eventually benefit from this green technology as well as costs decline further, for the time being the industry continues to tread the traditional path of “pollute first, clean up afterwards.” At stake are the underrepresented groups in Chinese society, especially rural farmers who depend on increasingly polluted lands for a living. China’s shining solar industry, while enabling blue skies elsewhere, is leaving behind a scarred landscape at home.
So far, the environment has been the biggest loser in China’s rapid economic growth. The irony of the recent Post exposé is that the environment is not even being considered seriously by those Chinese industries that bear a “green” tag, and whose products support progress toward a better environment. As China becomes more industrialized and strives to meet the insatiable demands of a burgeoning urban middle class, there is every reason to question how long the current state of affairs can last, and how much time it will take before businesses care enough about their impacts to truly protect the environment.
Yingling Liu is manager of the China Program at the Worldwatch Institute, a Washington-D.C. based environmental research organization.
------
http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/32974
1. Nuri Na
2. Bush Orders EPA to Weaken New Ozone Standards
3. This article shows that environmental issues are closely related to politics. In fact ozone standards have to be restrictive to prevent air pollutions. However in this case, EPA's attempt to make stricter standards fell through because of the political influence. I assume that it would be also correlated with large companies. Stricter standards would make companies less beneficial. The close relation among environment, politics and economy can be seen through this article.
-----------------------------------
President favors politics and polluters over science and public welfare
On March 13, 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency set new ozone standards that place stricter limits on the release of smog-producing air pollutants that can cause serious health effects and even premature death. But under last-minute pressure from the White House, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson made the standards significantly less restrictive than those recommended by the agency’s scientific advisers.
The White House also instructed the EPA to remove a separate standard designed to protect forests, land, soil, and crops from ozone air pollution. Research indicates that current ozone levels lead to dramatic reductions in plant and forest growth and cause adverse effects on overall ecosystem health. The EPA itself attests that ozone harms crop production and native ecosystems “more than any other air pollutant.”
Was White House Action Illegal?
According to documents released by the EPA, agency officials initially planned to set one ozone standard to protect "public health" and a lower seasonal limit to protect "public welfare" (forests, farmland, wildlife, etc.), as required under the Clean Air Act, but Bush overruled them.
He ordered the EPA to increase the lower limit and to set only one standard that would apply to both public health and public welfare.
"It is unprecedented and an unlawful act of political interference for the president personally to override a decision that the Clean Air Act leaves exclusively to EPA's expert scientific judgment," said John Walke, clean-air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The president's order sent administration officials scrambling to rewrite the regulations to avoid a conflict with past EPA statements on the harm caused by ozone and to prepare legal justifications for the weaker standard.
“For generations, a time-tested commitment to science and law has protected America’s health and environment,” said Vickie Patton, deputy general counsel for Environmental Defense Fund and a former attorney for the EPA General Counsel’s office. “The White House today cast aside science and law to impose its will upon EPA, leaving America’s health and environment behind.”
Here are the basics of the new ozone standard:
The EPA tightened the ozone standard from 80 parts per billion (ppb) to 75 ppb. The agency estimates that by 2020 the new standard will prevent at least 820 deaths, 1,400 heart attacks, 1,890 emergency room visits for asthma, and 610,000 lost school days annually.
By constrast, the EPA’s independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee unanimously recommended a more restrictive standard of 60 ppb to 70 ppb. The EPA estimates that by 2020 an ozone health standard of 65 ppb—the midpoint of the recommended range—would prevent at least 2,330 deaths, 4,000 heart attacks, 4,600 emergency room visits for asthma, and 1,300,000 lost school days annually. The EPA's Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee and many public health advocates lobbied for the 60 ppb limit because children are more vulnerable to air pollution.
"Smog doesn't just ruin your view; it poses serious health risks, especially to children and senior citizens,” said Ed Hopkins, director of the Sierra Club's Environmental Quality Program. “Study after study shows that to protect public health we need to significantly lower the amount of smog in our air. EPA's new smog standard does not go far enough to protect public health. We know that smog can still cause serious harm at levels below this standard.
"Almost half of all Americans live in areas with unsafe levels of smog, yet the EPA has failed to take appropriate protective action,” Hopkins said. “It has ignored the advice of the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association and even the unanimous recommendation of its own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Once again the EPA has put industry before public health, and our communities will pay the price.”
What Does the Clean Air Act Require?
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review the science related to ground-level ozone and other air quality issues every five years and determine whether national air standards should be adjusted to bring them in line with new findings. The agency last revised national ozone standards in 1997. The EPA missed its deadline for reviewing the ozone standards, which prompted a lawsuit by the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense Fund, Earthjustice and other groups concerned about clean air. The EPA decision announced on March 13 was required as part of a court-ordered settlement.
The Clean Air Act requires one standard for protecting public health and a separate one for protecting public welfare, which includes “effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-made materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and climate, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards to transportation, as well as effects on economic values and on personal comfort and well-being.”
White House Intervenes to Direct EPA Decision
In a March 6 memo, Susan E. Dudley of the Office of Management and Budget pressured EPA staff to abandon the secondary standard for public welfare, in part because of the potential costs. Marcus C. Peacock of the EPA replied to Dudley’s memo the next day, saying that “EPA cannot consider costs in setting a secondary standard.”
Peacock’s position was not based on some arbitrary internal EPA policy. The Clean Air Act states very clearly that the nation must set clean air standards based on science alone. Furthermore, a unanimous Supreme Court decision in 2001, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, held that national air quality standards are to be based solely on science, consistent with 30 years of successful implementation of the Clean Air Act.
When the EPA stood firm for science, the matter was referred to President Bush, and on March 11 the president intervened directly to settle the dispute by ordering that the secondary standard to protect public welfare should be identical to the new primary standard for public health.
The EPA estimates that it will cost polluting industries $7.6 billion to $8.8 billion a year to meet the 75-ppb standard, but that the rule will yield $2 billion to $19 billion in health benefits.
-----------------------------------
http://environment.about.com/od/airquality/a/bush_ozone.htm
1. Hyeseon Jeong
2. Salmon collapse in California could lead to Pacific fishing ban; feds take first step
3. We’ve talking about ‘Good’ example about sustainable fishery in last class, this article about somewhat different example in American fishery now going on. There are many ways to deal with this issue. We are already covered that centralized policy by government is not always better decentralized and independent policy of local community. Many Korean coastal communities on the west, east and south sea also have seen declines and changes in their fishery, caused by many uncertain factors such as unusual weather pattern, oil-split accident and so on. How can we solve these problems? I agree people as human being are not only economically rational, but also politically rational and can do make organization through accepted ways. This kind of problems can be solved by harmonized process between public sector and private sector. Added to this, most important thing on this kind of process is ‘predict & prepare’ not treat after disaster.
-----------------------------------
(The Associated Press, Saturday, March 15, 2008) SACRAMENTO, Calif.
: Federal fisheries managers took the first step Friday toward imposing what could be the strictest limits ever on West Coast salmon fishing amid a collapse of the central California chinook salmon fishery.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council unanimously adopted three options for sport and commercial fishing off the Pacific Coast, including an unprecedented complete shutdown of fishing off California and Oregon.
"This is a major disaster. We've never had one ever like this," council chairman Donald Hansen said after the vote. "It will have a major impact on California commercial fisheries for salmon, recreational fisheries, California charters."
The closest the council has come to halting all salmon fishing was 2006, when a decline in Northern California's Klamath River run forced severe restrictions on the number of fish caught.
The other options are severely limiting fishing, or hiring fisherman to catch and release salmon for scientific projects. Both those options would require the federal government to grant an emergency rule because the salmon numbers are so low.
The fishery council is expected to decide which action to take in April during its meeting in Seattle.
"I think the likeliest outcome this year is no one will put a hook in the water," said Humboldt County fisherman Dave Bitts, who was attending the weeklong meeting in Sacramento.
The Sacramento River chinook run is usually one of the most plentiful on the West Coast, providing the bulk of the fish caught by commercial trollers off California and Oregon.
But this year's returns even with no fishing allowed are expected to reach less than half the council's goal for spawning a new generation. It marks the third straight year of declines, and the outlook for next year is no better.
After years of declining salmon runs, few fishermen rely solely on salmon for a living.
Supplies of farm-raised fish and sockeye from Alaska are expected to remain plentiful in supermarkets and restaurants, but there will be few chinook. Also known as king salmon, they are the type of salmon most prized by chefs and sportsmen.
Many coastal communities that still have salmon fleets have yet to recover from long-standing downturns in fishing and timber.
"It's going to have a big effect on our coastal communities," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the San Francisco-based Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations.
It is the third straight year of hardship. In 2006, the season was curtailed to protect struggling chinook returns to the Klamath River in northern California. Last year, catches were poor despite a relatively open fishing season.
Congress authorized some aid for fishermen after the 2006 seasons, and California representatives are looking for more this year.
The council's action on Friday prompted Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the governors of Oregon and Washington to urge the federal government to declare a resource disaster if the fisheries are closed or severely restricted. Such a declaration would make communities eligible for federal aid.
Closing fisheries in California and most of Oregon also could lead to higher salmon prices for restaurants and consumers who would be forced to buy Alaska-caught salmon instead of locally caught fish.
In most years, about 90 percent of wild chinook salmon caught off the California coast originate in the Sacramento River and its tributaries.
Only about 90,000 adult salmon returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries to spawn last year, the second lowest number on record and well below the government's conservation goals, according to federal fishery regulators. That's down from 277,000 in 2006 and a record high of 804,000 in 2002.
Biologists predict this year's salmon returns could be even lower because the number of returning young male fish, known as "jacks," hit an all-time low last year. Only about 2,000 of them were recorded, which is far below the 40,000 counted in a typical year.
Other West Coast rivers also have seen declines in their salmon runs, though not as steep as California's Central Valley.
Experts are uncertain about what caused the collapse, pointing to dozens of factors.
Marine scientists blame an unusual weather pattern that triggered a collapse of the marine food web in 2005, the year most of this year's returning adults were entering the ocean as juveniles.
Fishermen, environmental groups and American Indians largely blame the salmon's troubles on poor water quality and water diversions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
(Associated Press Writer Jeff Barnard in Grants Pass, Ore., contributed to this report.)
*** On the Net:
Pacific Fishery Management Council: http://www.pcouncil.org
National Marine Fisheries Service: http://www.nmfs.gov
---------
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/15/america/Disappearing-Salmon.php?page=1
1. Keonhwa Sung
2. Recycling Of E-waste In China May Expose Mothers, Infants To High Dioxin Levels
3. The reason we have recycled waste is to save our environment. However, it happens unexpected results; "Chinese recycling methods significantly increase dioxin levels in women and their breast-fed infants." Based on this case, we have to consider how to recycle waste as well as recycling waste.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Recycling Of E-waste In China May Expose Mothers, Infants To High Dioxin Levels
ScienceDaily (Oct. 23, 2007) — With China now the destination for 70 percent of the computers, TVs, cell phones, and other electronic waste (e-waste) recycled worldwide each year, a new study has concluded that Chinese recycling methods significantly increase dioxin levels in women and their breast-fed infants.
Ming H. Wong and colleagues did one of what they describe as "very few" studies of dioxin levels among women of child bearing age at an e-waste recycling site, and compared those levels to women in an area without e-waste recycling.
They analyzed levels of dioxins - compounds linked to cancer, developmental defects, and other health problems - in samples of breast milk, placenta, and hair.
Samples from the e-waste site showed significantly higher levels of dioxins than those taken at the reference site. Researchers estimated that the daily intake of infants from 6 months of breast feeding at the recycling site was more than double that of the reference site.
Therefore, this implies that these levels at the recycling site and the reference site were at least 25 times and 11 times higher, respectively, than the World Health Organization tolerable daily limit for adults regarding dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs.
The study includes descriptions of recycling methods, which include heating scrap electronic components over coal fires in the open air.
The study "Body Loadings and Health Risk Assessment of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans at an Intensive Electronic Waste Recycling Site in China" is scheduled for the Nov. 15 issue of ACS' Environmental Science & Technology,.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071022094520.htm
Goeun Kim
Sudan Villagers Suffer Severe Water Contamination Caused by Oil Boom.
On March 6th 2008, according to OPEC(Organiztion of Petroleum Exporting Countries), oil prices hit a new record of $104.52 a barrel, first time ever in history.
The need for oil is rocketing father more than the quantity available and this has resulted in a demanding for new oil industries to drill more and more in countries where people are suffering for the damages caused by these desires.
Sudan villagers count for only one example where the sacrifice for hardcore oil desires from developed states, hurt those who are exploited from the oil boom. The Sudan villagers shouldn't be sacrificed for the lusts of oil industries in extracting oil without consent.
As we have learned so far in class, there are numerous causes of ocean pollution not only is it due to the oil boom, but the various needs of our lives have made nature beg for their saviour.
-----------------------------
[Sudan villagers, environment suffer from oil boom]
by Bogonko Bosire
Tue Mar 4, 10:13 AM ET
RIER, Sudan (AFP) - Kicked out of sleepy Nile fishing hamlets lost forever to Sudan's oil boom, villagers in the south curse a refinery for causing forced relocations, for spreading disease and ravaging the environment.
Activists also warn that the 2006 arrival of White Nile Petroleum Company (WNPOC), a consortium led by Malaysia's Petronas, in Unity State threatens the Sudd wetlands, the world's largest maze of swamps, lagoons and tributaries.
Villagers say thousands were forcefully evicted to make way for a low-sulphur crude oil venture in south-central Sudan. They say they lost venerated ancestral homes, died from contamination and saw livelihoods jeopardised.
"Since 2006, 27 adults and three children have died because of contaminated water from the oil field," said Paul Bol Ruoth, county commissioner in Koch, about 70 kilometres (44 miles) from Bentiu, the state capital.
The oil firm has not been reachable for comment on the allegations.
But more than 1,000 people are now sick with unknown illnesses and among the fatalities, only three have been compensated by WNPOC, local officials said.
Despite US-led sanctions to push Sudan to resolve the bloody war in Darfur, direct foreign investment in Sudan soared to 2.3 billion dollars in 2006, fueled by energy-hungry Asian economies led by China and Malaysia, just seven years after the country began exporting crude oil.
"The company (WNPOC) has no right. It's our people who have the right over their land because they need it for grazing and clean water," said Ruoth.
Deluged by a barrage of complaints from hapless villagers whose lives were already fractured by decades of civil war, he led a delegation in mid-February to assess the toll on the environment from the oil refinery.
"Since water is contaminated, we have lost several cows and goats," said an elder from the Nuer ethnic group, too fearful to give his name when talking to reporters on a visit to the area.
"We need help," he said, staring hopelessly at plumes of smoke from the Thar Jath oil refinery, named after the former village evacuated to make way for the complex and sitting in the heart of the partly drained Sudd swamp.
Villagers may be mesmerised by new roads and electricity cables, but they have seen little tangible improvement to their squalid lifestyle.
Now they are furious at the prospect of swanky hotels and malls in the swampy heartland, where government troops and and ex-southern rebels pounded once each other with high explosives in the 21-year-old civil war.
"We do not care about the new development they promised us. All we need is our old, clean environment," said unemployed Peter Riek Gieng, 25, who worked as a casual labourer to help build the refinery.
When oil is extracted, large amounts of saline water, or brine, are injected into the sub-surface to maintain the pressure of oil reservoirs, which enhances oil recovery, said human rights and Christian aid group Sign of Hope.
Sample results seen by AFP indicated that brine from the refinery produced a high salinity, putting the concentration of nitrate at 81.6 mg/l, well above the 10 mg/l recommended by the the US Environmental Protection Agency.
"A nitrate concentration amounting to 81.6 mg/l can have serious effects especially on young children," said Sign of Hope in a statement.
"Infants below the age of six months who drink water containing nitrate in this dose could become seriously ill and, if untreated, may die," it said.
The head of the organisation, Reimund Reubelt, called on the authorities to act now to prevent an ecological catastrophe.
"We also see a looming ecological catastrophe for the largest swamplands of the world. To secure public health the government must now improve the quality of drinking water dramatically and at the same time prevent an ecological catastrophe," he added.
At Riek village, where local residents were relocated to make way for the Thar Jath refinery about 6.5 kilometres (four miles) away, children play around a bore-hole abandoned as a source of water for health concerns.
One oil employee, who requested to remain unnamed, told journalists that he witnessed oil workers dumping industrial waste into a nearby isolated pit in a dried swamp, which will flood in the rainy season.
"I usually see men in aprons dig up huge pits and dump toxic wastes. They do not let anybody near that area," he said.
But aid workers complain that the administration in southern Sudan is reluctant to address the issue since officials are profiting from oil wealth.
Some villagers promised a Nigeria-like struggle on oil companies.
"If the government ignores, us we will go Nigeria style," said Martin Luang, a rugged middle-aged villager alluding to the wave of kidnappings of oil workers and relations of prominent Nigerians in the restive Niger Delta.
Sudan's oil production is estimated to reach between 500,000 and 600,000 barrels per day this year, but output is expected to rise in coming years and the boom in exploration is mainly in the southern region.
Although the north-south Sudan civil war ended with a peace agreement in 2005, both sides still bicker over shares of oil revenue.
--------
[URL / http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080304/lf_afp/sudanunrestpeaceoilenvironment_080304151354]
1. Jinyong LEE
2. Unique ecosystem of the DMZ under threat due to the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex
3. I am very interested in this region(DMZ) so i want to introduce this article. This article is from the Green Korea United(녹색연합), and shows that the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex in the north korea pollute the demilitarised zone (DMZ), which has to be one of the most inaptly named places in the world for there is a heavier concentration of military personnel here than perhaps anywhere else on the planet.
-------------------------------
date : 2007.09.30 13:25
Soyoung You
- No environmental effect evaluation step included in the process of developing a large-scale industrial complex.
- New regulation allows BOD of 30mg/l on the clear water with BOD 0.1mg/l
Gaeseong Industrial Complex, a symbol of reconciliation between the two Koreas, is projected to seriously contaminate the ecosystem of the DMZ as well as Sacheon and Imjin River. After analyzing the ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex environmental protection plan,’ (co-written by Korea Land Corporation and Hyundai Asan corp.) and ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex waster water plan report,’ Green Korea United (GKU) concluded that the currently installed terminal wastewater treatment facilities are not capable of purifying indissoluble and other heavy metal contaminants.
In addition, the BOD standard that has been suggested as the discharge standard is set at least 30 times higher than the current Sacheon water quality, which would lead to unavoidablecontamination of the wetlands of the western part of the DMZ, Sacheon, Imjin River and the estuary of the Han River, the only region in South Korea where nature is preserved as it is due to the region’s inaccessibility rising from political situation. Gaeseong Industrial Complex, the two Koreas’ joint project, plans to develop heavy and chemical industrial and industrial engineering complex of area 65.7km2 and population half a million and the first construction stage of area 3.28km2 is in progress currently.
Large scale development planunder progress without environmental effect evaluation.
Because of thespecial status of the South and North Economic Cooperation in Korea, a large scale development is currently in progress without the pre-construction environmental examination and environmental effect evaluation procedures to minimize the project’s environmental impacts. This is due to the virtual absence of legislative and institutional regulations regarding the environmental impacts of the South-North Economic Cooperation in Korea.
Current terminal wastewater treatmentfacilities incapable of purifying wastewater’s heavy metal and indissoluble materials.
One of the most prominent aspects of Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s environmental problem is the degradation of water quality. A significant number of businesses involved such as fiber, dyeing and leather enterprises release excessive amount of contaminants. Wastewater from assembling metal products also contain toxic materials such as heavy metal and cyanogens. Although the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex development plan’s terminal wastewater treatment facilities are scheduled to begin purifying 15,000 ton of wastewater from July, the treatment plans for wastewater from dyeing factories, leather and metal gilding industries have been excluded, which shifts the responsibility of purifying the metallic and indissoluble material on occupant businesses, as the Korea regulation states.
Nevertheless, it is not only difficult for incoming business enterprises that come to Gaeseong Industrial Complex for inexpensive production costs to spend enough funds for adequate treatment equipments, but the probability of their supplying funds for huge costs of transportation for chemicals released during the entire purifying process is also low. Thus, there is a high probability that metallic and indissoluble materials will be released after simple dilution, instead of being purified thoroughly.
Contamination of Sacheon Rive due to the wastewater treatment plant’s discharge quality and discharge quantity are self-evident.
The core problem of wastewater discharge lies on the quality standards of the discharged water and the quantity of the discharged water. Before the construction of the industrial complex, the water quality of Sacheon River where all the discharged water flow into was between BOD 0.1~1.0mg/l, which has earned it the prime I a class under South Korea’s stream water quality standard.
However, the new wastewater treatment facilities’ discharge water quality standard that incoming businesses in charge of maintaining environmental quality proposed and the two Koreas agreed upon allows BOD of up to 30mg/l. Allowing discharge of 30mg/l of wastewater will lead to 30~300times of BOD contamination on pure Sacheon River. In addition, although the measured flux of Sacheon River, which is the only stream where wastewater can be discharged, is 2.3m3/sec, the inflowing discharge quantity from the wastewater treatment plant from the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex is 0.35m3/sec, which constitutes 15% of Sacheon River’s total discharge quantity.
Because of such large amount and high concentration of discharged water, even the first stage of the development of Gaeseong Industrial Complex will have a serious impact on the streams, and the validity of the project regarding the entire 65.7km2 of Industrial Complex will need to be reexamined.
Damage done to the wetlands of the DMZ due to the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex inevitable.
The water quality problem of Gaeseong Industrial Complex does not end with Sacheon River. The water system of Gaeseong Industrial Complex flows from Sambong Creek-Sacheon River-Imjin River- Han River estuary to Northern Kyunggi Bay. Regions around Sacheon River, which has been free from human interference for 54 years, is an international ecological treasure house which penetrates the DMZ’s western wetlands. In addition, Imjin River and Han River are water sources indispensable to Kyunggi Province and north-western regions of the Great Seoul Area. The heart of the problem lies at the fact that Sacheon River is the only stream that receives Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s discharged wastewater.
Thus, when pollutants are released from Gaeseong Industrial Complex, contamination of all water systems from Sacheon River, Imjin River through to northern Kyunggi Bay is inevitable. This means destruction of ecological systems in the western wetlands of the DMZ and will also influence the fishing industry around Kanghwa Island area. The seriousness of the problem arises from the fact that once polluted, the recovery of the DMZ, Imjin River and the joint waters of the northern Kyunggi bay is impossible due to the anti-personnel mine problems and political sensitivity.
The government’s ambiguous stance towards the DMZ.
Conservation of the DMZ is in international interest, as the DMZ is the only wetlands in the world’s temperate region that developed for half a century free from human interference. Former President Daejoong Kim and President Roh also valued the DMZ’s unique and rich ecosystem and suggested a special kind of conservation policies to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry has already declared the DMZ as ‘natural reservation area’ under the Natural Environment Conservation Act and Kangwon Province and Kyunggi Province are already publicizing and commercializing the DMZ area.
Nevertheless, closer examination of the actual conservation activities around the DMZ and the Civilian Passage Restriction Line reveals that although the DMZ ‘s western wetlands of international worth is facing a threat of destruction, Ministry of Environment, which holds the primary responsibility and Ministry of National Unification, which is leading the conservation projects, have remained indifferent towards the situation. Neglecting these current pollution problems has high potential of inciting further social controversy in the future and this will have a negative influence on the the South and North Cooperation.
Gaeseong Industrial Complex should prioritize ecological conservation of the DMZ and the Korean peninsula.
-Gaeseong Industrial Complex currently uses the emission allowance standards of the environmental protection plan that enterprise partners Hyundai Asan corp. and Korea Land Corporation drafted and the two Koreas agreed upon. Under the abnormal operating system where the environmental overseer accepts the proposed standards of the business enterprises that should be the subjects of environmental regulations, the conservational value of the DMZ is not being considered at all. In order to conserve the DMZ and minimize environmental pollution, GKU sees following implantation as being necessary:
-Development of strict standards for the water quality of the discharged water from the terminal wastewater treatment facilities.
-Governmental aid for the operating and maintenance costs of the purifying processes and the smooth operation of wastewater treatment facilities
-Execution of environmental effect evaluation of the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and Sacheon River region that exceeds or is equal to domestic standards.
-Development of a detailed plan for long term monitoring of the contaminant releases from the incoming businesses.
In the long term, the government and business enterprises should block environmental degradation arising from economic developments that disregard the environmental impacts and minimize the negative environmental degradation in North Korea. In conclusion, the government should adopt policies to conserve North Korea’s environment and to guarantee sustainable development of the two Koreas.
-----------
http://www.greenkorea.org/zb/view.php?id=forests&page=1&sn1=&divpage=1&sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=9
Jinyoung LEE
title: Unique ecosystem of the DMZ under threat due to the wastewater from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex
This is an article from the Green Korea United(녹색연합)and shows that the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North korea pollute the demilitarised zone (DMZ), which has to be one of the most inaptly named places in the world for there is a heavier concentration of military personnel here than perhaps anywhere else on the planet.
Maybe people think that this region is untouched and well preserved because people are restricted to enter. However, it is not ok because of its political and economical reason. So, I want to introduce this article.
----------------------------
Soyoung You
- No environmental effect evaluation step included in the process of developing a large-scale industrial complex.
- New regulation allows BOD of 30mg/l on the clear water with BOD 0.1mg/l
Gaeseong Industrial Complex, a symbol of reconciliation between the two Koreas, is projected to seriously contaminate the ecosystem of the DMZ as well as Sacheon and Imjin River. After analyzing the ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex environmental protection plan,’ (co-written by Korea Land Corporation and Hyundai Asan corp.) and ‘Gaeseong Industrial Complex waster water plan report,’ Green Korea United (GKU) concluded that the currently installed terminal wastewater treatment facilities are not capable of purifying indissoluble and other heavy metal contaminants.
In addition, the BOD standard that has been suggested as the discharge standard is set at least 30 times higher than the current Sacheon water quality, which would lead to unavoidablecontamination of the wetlands of the western part of the DMZ, Sacheon, Imjin River and the estuary of the Han River, the only region in South Korea where nature is preserved as it is due to the region’s inaccessibility rising from political situation. Gaeseong Industrial Complex, the two Koreas’ joint project, plans to develop heavy and chemical industrial and industrial engineering complex of area 65.7km2 and population half a million and the first construction stage of area 3.28km2 is in progress currently.
Large scale development planunder progress without environmental effect evaluation.
Because of thespecial status of the South and North Economic Cooperation in Korea, a large scale development is currently in progress without the pre-construction environmental examination and environmental effect evaluation procedures to minimize the project’s environmental impacts. This is due to the virtual absence of legislative and institutional regulations regarding the environmental impacts of the South-North Economic Cooperation in Korea.
Current terminal wastewater treatmentfacilities incapable of purifying wastewater’s heavy metal and indissoluble materials.
One of the most prominent aspects of Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s environmental problem is the degradation of water quality. A significant number of businesses involved such as fiber, dyeing and leather enterprises release excessive amount of contaminants. Wastewater from assembling metal products also contain toxic materials such as heavy metal and cyanogens. Although the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex development plan’s terminal wastewater treatment facilities are scheduled to begin purifying 15,000 ton of wastewater from July, the treatment plans for wastewater from dyeing factories, leather and metal gilding industries have been excluded, which shifts the responsibility of purifying the metallic and indissoluble material on occupant businesses, as the Korea regulation states.
Nevertheless, it is not only difficult for incoming business enterprises that come to Gaeseong Industrial Complex for inexpensive production costs to spend enough funds for adequate treatment equipments, but the probability of their supplying funds for huge costs of transportation for chemicals released during the entire purifying process is also low. Thus, there is a high probability that metallic and indissoluble materials will be released after simple dilution, instead of being purified thoroughly.
Contamination of Sacheon Rive due to the wastewater treatment plant’s discharge quality and discharge quantity are self-evident.
The core problem of wastewater discharge lies on the quality standards of the discharged water and the quantity of the discharged water. Before the construction of the industrial complex, the water quality of Sacheon River where all the discharged water flow into was between BOD 0.1~1.0mg/l, which has earned it the prime I a class under South Korea’s stream water quality standard.
However, the new wastewater treatment facilities’ discharge water quality standard that incoming businesses in charge of maintaining environmental quality proposed and the two Koreas agreed upon allows BOD of up to 30mg/l. Allowing discharge of 30mg/l of wastewater will lead to 30~300times of BOD contamination on pure Sacheon River. In addition, although the measured flux of Sacheon River, which is the only stream where wastewater can be discharged, is 2.3m3/sec, the inflowing discharge quantity from the wastewater treatment plant from the first stage of Gaeseong Industrial Complex is 0.35m3/sec, which constitutes 15% of Sacheon River’s total discharge quantity.
Because of such large amount and high concentration of discharged water, even the first stage of the development of Gaeseong Industrial Complex will have a serious impact on the streams, and the validity of the project regarding the entire 65.7km2 of Industrial Complex will need to be reexamined.
Damage done to the wetlands of the DMZ due to the wastewater from Gaeseong Industrial Complex inevitable.
The water quality problem of Gaeseong Industrial Complex does not end with Sacheon River. The water system of Gaeseong Industrial Complex flows from Sambong Creek-Sacheon River-Imjin River- Han River estuary to Northern Kyunggi Bay. Regions around Sacheon River, which has been free from human interference for 54 years, is an international ecological treasure house which penetrates the DMZ’s western wetlands. In addition, Imjin River and Han River are water sources indispensable to Kyunggi Province and north-western regions of the Great Seoul Area. The heart of the problem lies at the fact that Sacheon River is the only stream that receives Gaeseong Industrial Complex’s discharged wastewater.
Thus, when pollutants are released from Gaeseong Industrial Complex, contamination of all water systems from Sacheon River, Imjin River through to northern Kyunggi Bay is inevitable. This means destruction of ecological systems in the western wetlands of the DMZ and will also influence the fishing industry around Kanghwa Island area. The seriousness of the problem arises from the fact that once polluted, the recovery of the DMZ, Imjin River and the joint waters of the northern Kyunggi bay is impossible due to the anti-personnel mine problems and political sensitivity.
The government’s ambiguous stance towards the DMZ.
Conservation of the DMZ is in international interest, as the DMZ is the only wetlands in the world’s temperate region that developed for half a century free from human interference. Former President Daejoong Kim and President Roh also valued the DMZ’s unique and rich ecosystem and suggested a special kind of conservation policies to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry has already declared the DMZ as ‘natural reservation area’ under the Natural Environment Conservation Act and Kangwon Province and Kyunggi Province are already publicizing and commercializing the DMZ area.
Nevertheless, closer examination of the actual conservation activities around the DMZ and the Civilian Passage Restriction Line reveals that although the DMZ ‘s western wetlands of international worth is facing a threat of destruction, Ministry of Environment, which holds the primary responsibility and Ministry of National Unification, which is leading the conservation projects, have remained indifferent towards the situation. Neglecting these current pollution problems has high potential of inciting further social controversy in the future and this will have a negative influence on the the South and North Cooperation.
Gaeseong Industrial Complex should prioritize ecological conservation of the DMZ and the Korean peninsula.
-Gaeseong Industrial Complex currently uses the emission allowance standards of the environmental protection plan that enterprise partners Hyundai Asan corp. and Korea Land Corporation drafted and the two Koreas agreed upon. Under the abnormal operating system where the environmental overseer accepts the proposed standards of the business enterprises that should be the subjects of environmental regulations, the conservational value of the DMZ is not being considered at all. In order to conserve the DMZ and minimize environmental pollution, GKU sees following implantation as being necessary:
-Development of strict standards for the water quality of the discharged water from the terminal wastewater treatment facilities.
-Governmental aid for the operating and maintenance costs of the purifying processes and the smooth operation of wastewater treatment facilities
-Execution of environmental effect evaluation of the Gaeseong Industrial Complex and Sacheon River region that exceeds or is equal to domestic standards.
-Development of a detailed plan for long term monitoring of the contaminant releases from the incoming businesses.
In the long term, the government and business enterprises should block environmental degradation arising from economic developments that disregard the environmental impacts and minimize the negative environmental degradation in North Korea. In conclusion, the government should adopt policies to conserve North Korea’s environment and to guarantee sustainable development of the two Koreas.
--------
http://www.greenkorea.org/zb/view.php?id=forests&page=1&sn1=&divpage=1&sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=9
http://www.greenkorea.org/zb/view.php?id=forests&page=1&sn1=&divpage=1&sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=headnum&desc=asc&no=9
Post a Comment