• by Judy Molland
• June 10, 2012

Read more: animal rights, france, georges franju, le sang des betes, paris, slaughterhouses, vegetarianim

Photo Credit: screenshot form vimeo video

Quote:

Smoggiest May In Five Years

• by Moms Clean Air Force
• June 12, 2012

by Molly Rauch

This week the non-profit group Clean Air Watch took a look at how much smog Americans have endured this spring. Clean Air Watch examined the number of states in which smog, or ozone, exceeded national standards in the month of May, as well as the number of times state ozone monitors registered levels above the federal standards.

Smog is caused by pollution from cars, trucks, power plants and other industrial sources. It damages lungs and triggers asthma attacks, among other health impacts. In May 2012, 31 states had smog “exceedences” (the technical term for when an air quality monitor measures ozone levels that exceed federal standards). There were a total of 854 such events. This number is almost triple the number of similar events in May of 2011.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors air pollution around the country through a nationwide network of monitors. (See here for a map of the air-monitoring network.) When a monitor detects ozone, or smog, in violation of federal ozone standards, it is posted on the AirNow website – but that website only shows you what’s happening today, not what’s happening this year.

Clean Air Watch says that, based on these nationwide air quality monitors, we’ve had the smoggiest May in at least 5 years. Why was it so bad? As Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch explained, ozone is created when emissions mix with heat and sunlight.“Hot weather helped trigger a problem,” he said. “We need to tackle the root cause, which is pollution.” O’Donnell also pointed out that global warming will create the weather conditions that will lead to more smog, which is something Moms Clean Air Force is also concerned about.

To add insult to injury, these exceedences are based on the federal ozone standard set by George W. Bush in 2008 – a standard that the EPA admits is too weak to adequately protect asthmatics and others from health damage. John Walke, clean air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, lays the history of that standard bare in painful detail in an illuminating post that will leave you speechless (breathless?) over the compromised process by which the government sets health protective air pollution standards.

It’s a circus of moneyed influence and neglected science.

As Walke points out, the 2008 Bush standard studiously ignored the advice of the scientific board tasked with advising EPA on the health effects of ozone:

“Despite the Clean Air Act requirement that clean air standards be reviewed and revised every five years, the Bush administration delayed and failed to revise the 1997 ozone standards until March of 2008. Then-EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson disregarded the unanimous recommendations of EPA’s independent, expert science advisors that the 84 ppb standard be lowered to between 60 and 70 ppb in order to protect public health with an adequate safety margin. Instead Johnson set the standard well outside that range at 75 ppb.

After Johnson rejected the science advisors’ unanimous ozone advice, the advisors took the extraordinary step of writing a strong letter to him condemning his weaker 75 ppb standard: “[T]he members of the CASAC Ozone Review Panel do not endorse the new primary ozone standard as being sufficiently protective of public health.”

That standard, which the CASAC Ozone Review Panel did not endorse, is still our nation’s standard, because last September, President Obama delayed updating it yet again. As Walke writes, that decision has real-life implications for our nation’s health:

“By blocking a stronger smog standard, first at 65 ppb and then at 70 ppb, the president and White House officials have allowed the following health hazards to occur every year until that standard eventually is strengthened and enforced: 4,300 to 8,000 premature deaths; 2,200 to 3,800 nonfatal heart attacks; and 23,000 to 40,000 asthma attacks.”

All this means that our current smog standard, the one by which state air monitoring stations mark our air’s compliance, is too weak to protect our health. As Frank O’Donnell of Clean Air Watch said, the exceedances are “an underestimation of the true problem.”

Support Clean Air with Moms Clean Air Force

Related Stories:

Spring of 2012 Warmest on Record

Pollution Puts Athletes At Risk

Pregnant? Every Breath You Take Counts

Read more: asthma, environment, global warming, politics, pollution

Photo credit: Steven Buss

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/smoggiest-may-in-five-years.html#ixzz1xgoy2U1X

Quote:

More on the march for the closure of slaughterhouses ("MARCHE POUR LA FERMETURE DES ABATTOIRS")

March for the closure of slaughterhouses Paris, Saturday 2nd June In Paris, on Saturday, 2nd June at 2.30pm there will be a meeting at the symbolic location of the old slaughterhouses of Vaugirard in the 15th Arrondissment, where Georges Franju partly shot the movie "Animal's blood" in 1949: "The first time I went there, I came back home, cried for two days, hid away all the knives, I just wanted to die1" → Watch Georges Franju's movie Most people, like Georges Franju, are shocked by the slaughter of animals. Because in a slaughterhouse, we witness the suffering, the distress, the hopelessness, and the terrible fright of a sentient being. Because we know that we would have the exact same feelings if we were in these circumstances. Because we know there is no ethical justification for killing an animal that wanted to carry on with its life. Slaughterhouses are a major moral question for our society and confront us with our contradictions and our cowardice. As many famous personalities before them, the protesters will demand the end of the killing of animals for the sake of producing food and pay their respects to the billions of animals put down in slaughterhouses or fisheries-- who are uncountable victims of our eating and cultural habits, our dietary beliefs, and the power of lobbyists. A commemorative stone will be placed upon one of the statues at the entrance of the old slaughterhouses. Then, the protesters will march to the square Joachim du Bellay where the 3rd edition of the Vegfest, a public debate society, will put forward credible alternatives to the "products" of the slaughterhouses. → Website of the march for the closure of slaughterhouses What: March for the closure of slaughterhouses When: Saturday, 2nd June 2.30pm Where: he old slaughterhouses of Vaugirard, Square Georges Brassens, rue des Morillons, Paris XV. At the same time, a march will take place in Castres, from the city centre to the slaughterhouses. Press Contact: Maï-wen Wauthy : 0033/ 7 78 66 21 82 Brigitte Gothière : 0033/ 6 20 03 32 66 Photos and videos available upon request Killed unnecessarily Slaughterhouses, either on land or at sea, are working at full capacity: every year, about 60 billion land animals are killed; the number of caught fish is approximately 1000 billion, to which hundreds of billions of victims of aquaculture can be added. Most of the reared animals live a horrifying existence before they are put to death. Yet, these bred or captured animals are conscious beings; they have knowledge, desires, emotions. We know human beings do not need animal products to live a healthy life. The existence of millions of vegetarians all over the world is ample evidence that it is possible to eat healthily without taking part in this bloodshed. Farming practices produce enough plant-based foodstuffs to provide each and everyone with a high quality diet. → Offical position of the American Dietetic Association Meat, yes, but without making animals suffer? This is the most commonly expressed view. But it is unrealistic to imagine we can one day manage to offer a decent life and a painless death to the billions of animals killed each year throughout the world for the human diet. How could a farmer who produces chicken meat with thousands of birds, with the best of intentions in the world, ensure them appropriate living conditions? How many millions of extra people would need to be paid to properly look after the animals? Who will pay the tens of thousands of inspectors who would be necessary to carefully check that standards are being kept up? Sacred life vs. Expendable life Even perpetrated "decently," the murder of a human being is considered the worst of crimes. Conversely, cutting the throat of animals in slaughterhouses and the suffocation of fish out of water are trivialised activities. A whole industry is working for it. How can such an asymmetry in the value granted to the lives of the former and the latter be justified? Closing slaughterhouses: a utopian project? The moral condemnation of the mistreatment of animals is widely shared: most people agree that they should not have to suffer for no good reason, nor be killed without necessity. It is factually true that farming, hunting and fishing kill, and that they inflict considerable pain on animals. It is factually true that humans do not need to consume animal products in order to lead healthy lives. Not eating meat does not bar the way to a fulfilled life or the enjoyment of eating. Spontaneous changes in consumer behaviour are not sufficient to put an end to the butchery. The problems of road safety, pollution, human poverty or child abuse cannot be solved just by relying on the capacity of each person to modify their habits to remedy the situation, even when they are generally acknowledged to be wrong. In all of these areas,progress demands resorting to legislation and public policies, which is justified since mistreatment, torture and killing remain outside of the legitimate domain of individual liberties. It is a question of obtaining the consent of our societies to eradicate this practice, based on the recognition of the great harm that it causes to animals.This recognition only requires the effective application of what is already common morality. The demand for meat abolition will take place in the current political agenda. We can imagine its culmination within the framework of institutions and social organisation that we already know. An old demand We have engaged in critical reflection about the implications of animal use for food since antiquity and continue to today. FromPlutarque to Yourcenar,Voltaire or Gandhi, many renowned thinkers participated in this reflection. Some societies refused killing for food, such as the Cathares and a noteworthy part of the population of India or the wise Sufis. The success ofJonathan Safran Foer’s book Eating Animals indicates this reflection is, more than ever, a current concern. Past injustices have been abolished or reduced, such as human slavery or the inferior status assigned to women. They were also supported by powerful interests; they were also deeply rooted in the collective consciousness to the point that the majority believed them to be eternal. So why not farming and fishing? → More Press Contact: Maï-wen Wauthy : 0033/ 7 78 66 21 82 Brigitte Gothière : 0033/ 6 20 03 32 66 Photos and videos available upon request 1. « Tueurs sans haine », Georges Franju, cinéaste, Paris, Maison de la Villette, 17-21, 1992

[Related video]

Quote:
The root cause is not man's .0001 percent contribution to the problem, its all the animals in the world producing methane, its all the volcanoes spewing ash and co2 among other things, its the co2 captured in the used to be frozen tundra of the norther and most southern areas, its the continuous co2 and other gasses spewed out through the ocean waters and the most obvious suspect is the SUN that is tossing out extra heat and gamma rays due to its own volcanic activity. Wake up folks its a cycle, Miguel, you and I have have lived long enough to see them happening. Do not fall for the socialist/Marxist/fascist/Nazi/communist,caliphate crap my friend. You are wiser than that, I thought.

Quote:

Smoggiest May In Five Years

• by Moms Clean Air Force
• June 12, 2012

by Molly Rauch

This week the non-profit group Clean Air Watch took a look at how much smog Americans have endured this spring. Clean Air Watch examined the number of states in which smog, or ozone, exceeded national standards in the month of May, as well as the number of times state ozone monitors registered levels above the federal standards.

Smog is caused by pollution from cars, trucks, power plants and other industrial sources. It damages lungs and triggers asthma attacks, among other health impacts. In May 2012, 31 states had smog “exceedences” (the technical term for when an air quality monitor measures ozone levels that exceed federal standards). There were a total of 854 such events. This number is almost triple the number of similar events in May of 2011.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors air pollution around the country through a nationwide network of monitors. (See here for a map of the air-monitoring network.) When a monitor detects ozone, or smog, in violation of federal ozone standards, it is posted on the AirNow website – but that website only shows you what’s happening today, not what’s happening this year.

Clean Air Watch says that, based on these nationwide air quality monitors, we’ve had the smoggiest May in at least 5 years. Why was it so bad? As Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch explained, ozone is created when emissions mix with heat and sunlight.“Hot weather helped trigger a problem,” he said. “We need to tackle the root cause, which is pollution.” O’Donnell also pointed out that global warming will create the weather conditions that will lead to more smog, which is something Moms Clean Air Force is also concerned about.

To add insult to injury, these exceedences are based on the federal ozone standard set by George W. Bush in 2008 – a standard that the EPA admits is too weak to adequately protect asthmatics and others from health damage. John Walke, clean air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, lays the history of that standard bare in painful detail in an illuminating post that will leave you speechless (breathless?) over the compromised process by which the government sets health protective air pollution standards.

It’s a circus of moneyed influence and neglected science.

As Walke points out, the 2008 Bush standard studiously ignored the advice of the scientific board tasked with advising EPA on the health effects of ozone:

“Despite the Clean Air Act requirement that clean air standards be reviewed and revised every five years, the Bush administration delayed and failed to revise the 1997 ozone standards until March of 2008. Then-EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson disregarded the unanimous recommendations of EPA’s independent, expert science advisors that the 84 ppb standard be lowered to between 60 and 70 ppb in order to protect public health with an adequate safety margin. Instead Johnson set the standard well outside that range at 75 ppb.

After Johnson rejected the science advisors’ unanimous ozone advice, the advisors took the extraordinary step of writing a strong letter to him condemning his weaker 75 ppb standard: “[T]he members of the CASAC Ozone Review Panel do not endorse the new primary ozone standard as being sufficiently protective of public health.”

That standard, which the CASAC Ozone Review Panel did not endorse, is still our nation’s standard, because last September, President Obama delayed updating it yet again. As Walke writes, that decision has real-life implications for our nation’s health:

“By blocking a stronger smog standard, first at 65 ppb and then at 70 ppb, the president and White House officials have allowed the following health hazards to occur every year until that standard eventually is strengthened and enforced: 4,300 to 8,000 premature deaths; 2,200 to 3,800 nonfatal heart attacks; and 23,000 to 40,000 asthma attacks.”

All this means that our current smog standard, the one by which state air monitoring stations mark our air’s compliance, is too weak to protect our health. As Frank O’Donnell of Clean Air Watch said, the exceedances are “an underestimation of the true problem.”

Support Clean Air with Moms Clean Air Force

Related Stories:

Spring of 2012 Warmest on Record

Pollution Puts Athletes At Risk

Pregnant? Every Breath You Take Counts

Read more: asthma, environment, global warming, politics, pollution

Photo credit: Steven Buss

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/smoggiest-may-in-five-years.html#ixzz1xgoy2U1X