skip to main content

→ Top Stories:
Clean Power plan
Safe Chemicals

NRDC News’s Blog

NRDC in the News 12/1: Oil Sands Report, Ship Ballast Water Rules, Green Technology and more...


Posted December 1, 2011

Share | | |

Susan Casey-Lefkowitz was quoted in a Wall Street Journal, MarketWatch piece about NRDC’s newly released “Pipeline and Tanker Trouble” report, which explains the dangers of using Alberta’s oil sands in the proposed Keystone XL pipeline… In a CBS News piece, Anthony Swift criticized Republican-sponsored legislation that would force an expedited decision-making process for the Keystone XL Pipeline permit… Anthony was also quoted in the print edition of the San Francisco Chronicle about shortcomings of this proposed legislation… NRDC’s report was also featured in Mother Jones, Fox News, and the Houston Chronicle

Thom Cmar spoke to the Associated Press about inadequate new EPA regulations for cleaning ballast water; this piece was widely circulated in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Business Week, Salon, ABC News and the Chicago Tribune… In a Los Angeles Times piece about green technology investment trends, Judith Albert, NRDC’s E2 Executive Director, explained how clean tech investors were not shaken by the Solyndra controversy... The Associated Press ran a story about NRDC and nine other environmental groups challenging an arctic drilling air permit… NRDC was mentioned in a Washington Post blog article about a joint letter to Secretary of State Clinton, condemning the Obama Administration for failing to engage in global climate change negotiations.

Share | | |


don mitchelDec 2 2011 09:07 AM

Ballast water and the general public's awareness!
Now the EPA plan wants to basically follow the international economic interest of the IMO for creating US environmental policy and still no National news coverage.
Many important issue's that the American voters need to know are never mentioned and are covered up by the US network media. If it is political and has to do with hurting economic globalization they will never inform the American people.---- an example of a media lie by omission, (you can find this on the web) is the major international health problems and economic problems ballast water is creating.
It is now Dec2011 and again another Coast Guard rummer ed deadline for their ballast water plan has passed. Currently this is causing Canada and the Great Lakes States health, environmental and economic concern, as New York and California's Senator Boxer's use of state rights has thwarted the introduction of strong reasonable national legislation. It appears the goal will now be to wait and allow an international organization of diverse governments and business's (the IMO) to decide the amount of human virus and bacteria they dump in our waters delivering foreign made products. These politician who are pushing for regulation reportedly 100 times greater than what the weak IMO goal, know that the strict standards they are looking for will never be agreed to in congress and, although the IMO regulations are far from adequate watch and see if they do not relinquish their demands to the IMO or a Coast Guard plan which follows the IMO lead. Louise Slaughter rep from NY, who voted for the strong legislation passed in the House during 2008 has already ask for the weaker Coast Guards regulations. Sadly this problem could have been solved, but NY decided to develop their own regulations in 2008 and did not push for the strong legislation H.R.2830 passed bi partisan in the House (395-7), while Senator Boxer killed the legislation allegedly over her states right to stronger legislation. She never did introduce an alternative after killing h.r.2830, which most environmentalist and many in the shipping industry reportedly supported. Now we have nothing adequate that environmentalist or the shipping industry support. Had they acted while their party had controlled of the Senate, House and presidency the IMO would already be following much stronger goals to protect American waters, than what our Coast Guard has rummer ed they would someday present. Rumor now has it the IMO ballast water convention will be ratified coincidentally around the time New York delayed implementation of their regulations is to take affect . ( 2013)
The Republicans are at least honest about it and have recently introduced bad ballast water legislation admitting they want foreign economic influence to determine America's environmental policy, regardless of the International Maritime Organization lousy track record. This is despite the majority of those reelected at mid terms voting for the stronger legislation in 2008.
The travesty is that strong national ballast water legislation would hurt the cheap price of foreign made goods. The following excerpt is from a report prepared for Congress in 2009 detailing the cost for ballast water technology:
"Most of this expense will be borne by
foreign shipping companies, as the U.S. flag fleet is a small percentage of the global fleet,16 and
likely passed along to consumers of products imported on these ships.”
Products are manufactured were labor cost are lowest and the cost to deliver product to market are insignificant .
The current ballast water policy's of our politicians will preserve America's economic dependence on the global economy to deliver cheap foreign made goods to our largest employers.

Comments are closed for this post.


Switchboard is the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the nation’s most effective environmental group. For more about our work, including in-depth policy documents, action alerts and ways you can contribute, visit

Feeds: NRDC News’s blog

Feeds: Stay Plugged In