Toxic wastewater from Ohio train derailment headed to Texas
February 23, 2023
FILE – This photo taken with a drone shows portions of a Norfolk Southern freight train that derailed Friday night in East Palestine, Ohio are still on fire at mid-day Saturday, Feb. 4, 2023. Toxic wastewater used to extinguish a fire following a train derailment in Ohio is headed to a Houston suburb for disposal. Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo says “firefighting water” from the East Palestine, Ohio train derailment is to be disposed of in the county and she is seeking more information.(AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar) (ASSOCIATED PRESS)
DEER PARK, Texas (AP) — Toxic wastewater used to extinguish a fire following a train derailment in Ohio is headed to a Houston suburb for disposal.
“I and my office heard today that ‘firefighting water’ from the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment is slated to be disposed of in our county,” Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo said in a Wednesday statement.
“Our Harris County Pollution Control Department and Harris County Attorney’s have reached out to the company and the Environmental Protection Agency to receive more information,” Hidalgo wrote.
The wastewater is being sent to Texas Molecular, which injects hazardous waste into the ground for disposal.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality told KTRK-TV that Texas Molecular “is authorized to accept and manage a variety of waste streams, including vinyl chloride, as part of their … hazardous waste permit and underground injection control permit.”
The company told KHOU-TV it is experienced in managing this type of disposal.
“Our technology safely removes hazardous constituents from the biosphere. We are part of the solution to reduce risk and protect the environment, whether in our local area or other places that need the capabilities we offer to protect the environment,” the company said.
The fiery Feb. 3 derailment in Ohio prompted evacuations when toxic chemicals were burned after being released from five derailed tanker rail cars carrying vinyl choride that were in danger of exploding.
“It’s … very, very toxic,” Dr. George Guillen, the executive director of the Environmental Institute of Houston, said, but the risk to the public is minimal.
“This injection, in some cases, is usually 4,000 or 5,000 feet down below any kind of drinking water aquifer,” said Guillen, who is also a professor of biology and environmental science at the University of Houston-Clear Lake.
Both Guillen and Deer Park resident Tammy Baxter said their greatest concerns are transporting the chemicals more than 1,300 miles (2,090 kilometers) from East Palestine, Ohio; to Deer Park, Texas.
“There has to be a closer deep well injection,” Baxter told KTRK. “It’s foolish to put it on the roadway. We have accidents on a regular basis … It is silly to move it that far.”
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who visited the derailment site Thursday, has warned the railroad responsible for the derailment, Norfolk Southern, to fulfill its promises to clean up the mess just outside East Palestine, Ohio, and help the town recover.
Jo Wood on gardening: ‘A surprise diagnosis opened my eyes to all the chemicals in food’
Ria Higgins – February 23, 2023
‘I loved the idea of being self-sufficient, not only growing my own food, but having my own heat, electricity and water supply’ – John Lawrence
The entrepreneur and ex-wife of Rolling Stones rocker Ronnie Wood on the joy of going off-grid and being in touch with nature.
Where do you live?
I live in Northamptonshire, near Silverstone, in a place I saw online four years ago. The property was being sold as an off-grid farmhouse and I’d dreamed of going off-grid. I loved the idea of being self-sufficient, not only growing my own food, but having my own heat, electricity and water supply. This was it! It came with six acres, old sheds and barns ripe for conversion. The land was barren and there was no garden, but it meant I could do things my way. After my divorce from Ronnie in 2011, I’d been living in central London, so it was a huge change.
What did you have to do to get the house and garden up and running?
I moved into the house in November 2019, and in those first few weeks, the water ran out, the solar panels didn’t work, the electrics were dodgy, and the generator for heat and light broke down. I sat in the kitchen and said to myself: “I’ve made such a terrible mistake.” But slowly, I found the right people to help me turn things around. A modern generator was installed, new solar panels fitted and, after locating an underground water supply, an engineer drilled a hole nearly 300ft down to provide me with my own water. It was expensive, but from then on, I’d have no more bills.
What were your plans for the garden?
One of the first things I did was to plant 70 trees, including willow, oak and apple. But my priority that first spring was to build raised beds for growing organic fruit and veg. Of course, four months after I moved in, the country went into lockdown; but with my son Tyrone and my daughter Leah and her family, we were all in the same bubble, so I got cracking and they helped me. Within no time, we’d sown everything from potatoes to pumpkins, with nasturtiums and calendula for colour. The house itself was already covered with climbing roses, so I planted lavender, rosemary and other scented herbs and flowers beneath.
‘One thing my kids were excited about was creating a wild swimming pond,’ says Jo Wood – John Lawrence
Why did you become so passionate about growing organic food?
I met Ronnie in 1977, when I was just 22. At that point, I had my son Jamie and he had his son Jesse. We had Leah and Tyrone together and got married in 1985. Then in 1990, I got ill and was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease. I was on steroids; I was miserable. Then someone who’d read about my illness told me to cut out processed foods and go organic – veg, fruit, meat, the lot. With nothing to lose, I did. Four months later, I felt fantastic. But I got ill again. This time, I found out I didn’t have Crohn’s, I had a perforated appendix. Doctors were amazed I was still alive. I recovered, but my eyes were opened to all the chemicals in food, so I became even more obsessed with organic.
How did your family react to your organic obsession?
Ronnie thought I was mad and the family banned me from using the word “organic”. But I was on a mission. The only thing I didn’t have was a garden big enough to grow my own food. It was when we went to stay at Ronnie’s house in Kildare, in Ireland, that I got my first taste of growing organic veg. I loved it. In fact, one year we had such a huge crop of potatoes, I put a load in a suitcase, took them to a Stones gig in Paris and asked their chef if he’d cook them. Keith Richards turned to me and said: “The trouble with you, darling, is that you’re addicted to organic.” Actually, Keith’s wife, Patti, has a veg garden in Connecticut. She gets it!
What other projects have you focused on in your new home?
One thing my kids were excited about was creating a wild swimming pond. It was part of my plan to rewild a huge section of the land that I’d already scattered with native wildflower seeds, such as red clover, cowslip, ragged robin and oxeye daisy. Tyrone took charge. He had the pond dug out and lined with local clay, and once we’d filled it with water, Leah, who now lives with her family up the road, helped me get started with aquatic plants such as water hawthorn, spearwort, lilies and yellow flag iris. By the second year, they all went mad. Glorious! It came alive with wildlife and watching birds fly in and out was magical.
Wood plans to have a whole field of lavender eventually – John Lawrence
Did you have a garden as a child?
Mum was from South Africa. She met Dad, who was from Devon, on a train. He was an architectural model maker and, after the war, he worked for Essex council on the model for a new town called Basildon. When it was completed, the council gave him a new council house and as soon as we moved in, Mum wanted chickens and an avocado tree – no one ate avocados back then. She also grew medicinal herbs; she was a huge believer in feverfew, an old remedy for fevers, and mullein, which is great for coughs. She’s inspired me to create a medicinal herb garden here. I might even grow avocados!
Do you think gardening is good for your mind as well as the body?
More and more, I find it’s so important to be outside, to soak up natural light, be in touch with nature, to feel the earth on my skin. In the summer, I often go around barefoot. Other times, there’s nothing like the simplicity of sitting under a tree and just soaking it all in. Trees are such amazing things. In 2016, I bought a little house with two acres in the hills of Murcia, in Spain, and filled it with fruit trees – pomegranate, fig, orange, lemon and olive. It’s my little getaway.
What’s your next project in the garden?
I have so many plans and one of them is to have a whole field of lavender. It would be so beautiful and I could get someone to harvest it. And now that we’ve got wildflowers, I also want to make my own honey. The bees will have a feast. Jamie’s also been studying the health benefits of supplements made from mushrooms and wants to start growing them, while Tyrone has converted old sheds into a bar and a play area for the kids. I’ve now got 10 grandchildren, so they have the best time here.
What have been the biggest challenges to going off-grid?
In the early days, I’d often have to stick on my wellies and go out in the rain in the middle of the night because the lights hadn’t come on or the hot water was like ice. Now, I’ve replaced everything and there’s an app on my phone that tells me if the generator’s on and how much heat I’m getting from my solar panels. It’s other things that give me grief. Rabbits. One morning, I came out to all these holes and half-eaten muddy carrots. The audacity! But mud or no mud, I haven’t given up my glamorous life altogether. I still swap my wellies and woolly hat for heels and sequins sometimes. I’ve got the best of both worlds.
Jo Wood’s organic product range is available to shop at jowoodorganics.com.
Judge rules New Mexico feral cattle can be shot from helicopters
Clark Mindock – February 22, 2023
A cow that has gotten loose from its pen stands in the middle of Hwy 10 in Winnie, Texas
(Reuters) -The U.S. Forest Service can go ahead with a plan to shoot dozens of feral cattle from helicopters in New Mexico’s Gila Wilderness after a federal judge on Wednesday refused a request by ranchers for an emergency order to stop the cull.
Cattle ranchers and local business owners told U.S. District Judge James Browning earlier on Wednesday at a hearing in Albuquerque the four-day hunt of about 150 stray or unbranded cows, due to start on Thursday, would violate federal laws and Forest Service regulations and likely kill cows they own.
In denying the plaintiffs’ bid for the emergency order, Browning said they were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their case and that of the approximately 300 cattle removed or killed over the last several decades “only one has been branded, and it was removed rather than killed.”
Jessica Blome, an attorney for the ranchers, said they are “deeply disappointed that the court green lit” the plan.
The Forest Service did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Forest Service announced the hunt last week, the second in as many years, saying feral cows were damaging habitats and menacing hikers who visit the vast Southwestern national monument known for its mountain ranges and plunging, rock-walled canyons.
U.S. Department of Justice attorney Andrew Smith, representing the Forest Service, argued on Wednesday that blocking the cull would allow feral cow populations to “rebound, and last year’s efforts would be wasted.”
Aerial hunting of feral hogs and predators like coyotes is a common practice in the American West but efforts to gun down cattle from above have been met with protest.
The New Mexico Cattle Growers Association (NMCGA), which had filed a lawsuit on Tuesday alongside other ranching, farming and business interests, said aerial shooting puts at risk privately owned cattle that may have strayed through broken fences or to find water. That loss harms an industry already hard-hit by climate change and rising costs, it said.
Ranchers also said helicopter hunting is inefficient and inhumane, causing cattle to run and forcing shooters to pepper cows with multiple rounds before they are left to die, sometimes days later.
NMCGA sued the Forest Service over its last cull, resulting in an out-of-court settlement. The ranchers said that agreement requires the government to give the public 75 days’ notice before it shoots feral cows from helicopters. The government provided just seven days’ notice this year, they said.
(Reporting by Clark Mindock in New York; Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi, Matthew Lewis and Tom Hogue)
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — A U.S. district judge on Wednesday cleared the way for federal officials to move ahead with plans to take to the air and shoot dozens of wild cattle in a rugged area of southwestern New Mexico.
Ranchers had sought a delay, arguing that the potential mass slaughter of as many as 150 “unauthorized” cows on public land was a violation of federal regulations and amounted to animal cruelty.
After listening to arguments that stretched throughout the day, Judge James Browning denied the request, saying the ranchers failed to make their case. He also said the U.S. Forest Service is charged with managing the wilderness for the benefit of the public, and the operation would further that aim.
“No one disputes that the Gila cattle need to be removed and are doing significant damage to the Gila Wilderness,” Browning wrote. “The court does not see a legal prohibition on the operation. It would be contrary to the public interest to stop the operation from proceeding.”
Plans by the Forest Service call for shooting the cattle with a high-powered rifle from a helicopter and leaving the carcasses in the Gila Wilderness. It was estimated by attorneys for the ranchers that 65 tons of dead animals would be left in the forest for months until they decompose or are eaten by scavengers.
Officials closed a large swath of the forest Monday and were scheduled to begin the shooting operation Thursday.
The New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association, individual ranchers and the Humane Farming Association filed a complaint in federal court Tuesday, alleging that agency officials were violating their own regulations and overstepping their authority.
The complaint stated that court intervention was necessary to put an immediate stop to “this unlawful, cruel, and environmentally harmful action, both now and in the future.”
The ranchers had argued that the case could set a precedent for how federal officials handle unbranded livestock on vacant allotments or deal with other land management conflicts across the West.
“There’s a severe danger here, not just in this particular case and the horrific results that it will actually bare if this is allowed to go forward. But it also has long-term ramifications for the power of federal agencies to disregard their regulations that they themselves passed,” Daniel McGuire, an attorney for the ranchers, told the judge.
The Gila National Forest issued its final decision to gun down the wayward cattle last week amid pressure from environmental groups that have raised concerns that cattle are compromising water quality and habitat for other species as they trample stream banks in sensitive areas.
Much of the debate during Wednesday’s hearing centered on whether the animals were unauthorized livestock or feral cows, as the Forest Service has been referring to them.
Ranchers said the cattle in question were the descendants of cows that legally grazed the area in the 1970s before the owner went out of business. They pointed to DNA and genetic markers, saying the temperament of the animals doesn’t mean they cease to be domesticated livestock.
As defined in Forest Service regulations, unauthorized livestock refers to any cattle, sheep, goats or hogs that are not authorized by permit to be grazing on national forest land. The regulations calls for an impoundment order to be issued and the livestock rounded up, with lethal action being a final step for those that aren’t captured.
Despite issuing such an order earlier this month, the agency argued it wasn’t required to follow the removal procedures outlined by the regulations because the cattle don’t fit the definition of livestock since they aren’t domesticated or being kept or raised by any individual.
Government attorney Andrew Smith said the cows have no pedigree.
“So it does make a difference what these cows are. They’re multigenerations of wildness going on,” he said.
The judge agreed.
Smith also argued that Congress has charged the Forest Service with protecting national forest land and that eradicating the cattle would put an end to decades of damage. He said previous gathering efforts over the decades only put a dent in the population but that an aerial shooting operation in 2022 was able to take out 65 cows in two days.
Had the project been delayed, Smith suggested that the population would rebound and last year’s effort would be wasted.
McGuire countered that Congress conferred authority on the Forest Service to make rules and regulations to protect and preserve the forest, not a license for the agency to do anything it wants.
As tractors became more sophisticated over the past two decades, the big manufacturers allowed farmers fewer options for repairs. Rather than hiring independent repair shops, farmers have increasingly had to wait for company-authorized dealers to arrive. Getting repairs could take days, often leading to lost time and high costs.
A new memorandum of understanding between the country’s largest farm equipment maker, John Deere Corp., and the American Farm Bureau Federation is now raising hopes that U.S. farmers will finally regain the right to repair more of their own equipment.
However, supporters of right-to-repair laws suspect a more sinister purpose: to slow the momentum of efforts to secure right-to-repair laws around the country.
Under the agreement, John Deere promises to give farmers and independent repair shops access to manuals, diagnostics and parts. But there’s a catch – the agreement isn’t legally binding, and, as part of the deal, the influential Farm Bureau promised not to support any federal or state right-to-repair legislation.
You can listen to more articles from The Conversation narrated by Noa.
The right-to-repair movement has become the leading edge of a pushback against growing corporate power. Intellectual property protections, whether patents on farm equipment, crops, computers or cellphones, have become more intense in recent decades and cover more territory, giving companies more control over what farmers and other consumers can do with the products they buy.
For farmers, few examples of those corporate constraints are more frustrating than repair restrictions and patent rights that prevent them from saving seeds from their own crops for future planting.
How a few companies became so powerful
The United States’ market economy requires competition to function properly, which is why U.S. antitrust policies were strictly enforced in the post-World War II era.
During the 1970s and 1980s, however, political leaders began following the advice of a group of economists at the University of Chicago and relaxed enforcement of federal antitrust policies. That led to a concentration of economic power in many sectors.
This concentration has become especially pronounced in agriculture, with a few companies consolidating market share in numerous areas, including seeds, pesticides and machinery, as well as commodity processing and meatpacking. One study in 2014 estimated that Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, was responsible for approximately 80% of the corn and 90% of the soybeans grown in the U.S. In farm machinery, John Deere and Kubota account for about a third of the market.
Market power often translates into political power, which means that those large companies can influence regulatory oversight, legal decisions, and legislation that furthers their economic interests – including securing more expansive and stricter intellectual property policies.
Whether the product is an automobile, smartphone or seed, companies can extract more profits if they can force consumers to purchase the company’s replacement parts or use the company’s exclusive dealership to repair the product.
One of the first cases that challenged the right to repair equipment was in 1939, when a company that was reselling refurbished spark plugs was sued by the Champion Spark Plug Co. for violating its patent rights. The Supreme Court agreed that Champion’s trademark had been violated, but it allowed resale of the refurbished spark plugs if “used” or “repaired” was stamped on the product.
Although courts have often sided with the end users in right-to-repair cases, large companies have vast legal and lobbying resources to argue for stricter patent protections. Consumer advocates contend that these protections prevent people from repairing and modifying the products they rightfully purchased.
The ostensible justification for patents, whether for equipment or seeds, is that they provide an incentive for companies to invest time and money in developing products because they know that they will have exclusive rights to sell their inventions once patented.
However, some scholars claim that recent legal and legislative changes to patents are instead limiting innovation and social benefits.
The problem with seed patents
The extension of utility patents to agricultural seeds illustrates how intellectual property policies have expanded and become more restrictive.
Patents have been around since the founding of the U.S., but agricultural crops were initially considered natural processes that couldn’t be patented. That changed in 1980 with the U.S. Supreme Court decision Diamond v. Chakrabarty. The case involved genetically engineered bacteria that could break down crude oil. The court’s ruling allowed inventors to secure patents on living organisms.
Half a decade later, the U.S. Patent Office extended patents to agricultural crops generated through transgenic breeding techniques, which inserts a gene from one species into the genome of another. One prominent example is the insertion of a gene into corn and cotton that enables the plant to produce its own pesticide. In 2001, the Supreme Court included conventionally bred crops in the category eligible for patenting.
Genetically modified seeds, and even conventionally bred crops, can be patented. Sean Gallup/Getty Images
Historically, farmers would save seeds that their crops generated and replant them the following season. They could also sell those seeds to other farmers. They lost the right to sell their seeds in 1970, when Congress passed the Plant Variety Protection Act. Utility patents, which grant an inventor exclusive right to produce a new or improved product, are even more restrictive.
Under a utility patent, farmers can no longer save seed for replanting on their own farms. University scientists even face restrictions on the kind of research they can perform on patented crops.
Because of the clear changes in intellectual property protections on agricultural crops over the years, researchers are able to evaluate whether those changes correlate with crop innovations – the primary justification used for patents. The short answer is that they do not.
One study revealed that companies have used intellectual property to enhance their market power more than to enhance innovations. In fact, some vegetable crops with few patent protections had more varietal innovations than crops with more patent protections.
How much does this cost farmers?
It can be difficult to estimate how much patented crops cost farmers. For example, farmers might pay more for the seeds but save money on pesticides or labor, and they might have higher yields. If market prices for the crop are high one year, the farmer might come out ahead, but if prices are low, the farmer might lose money. Crop breeders, meanwhile, envision substantial profits.
Similarly, it is difficult to calculate the costs farmers face from not having a right to repair their machinery. A machine breakdown that takes weeks to repair during harvest time could be catastrophic.
The nonprofit U.S. Public Interest Research Group calculated that U.S. consumers could save US$40 billion per year if they could repair electronics and appliances – about $330 per family.
The memorandum of understanding between John Deere and the Farm Bureau may be a step in the right direction, but it is not a substitute for right-to-repair legislation or the enforcement of antitrust policies.
Leland Glenna does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Column: Shrinking water supply will mean more fallow fields in the San Joaquin Valley
George Skelton – February 20, 2023
Irrigation in Kingsburg, Calif., in 2021. A deepening drought and new regulations are causing serious challenges for some California growers. (Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)
Downpours or drought, California’s farm belt will need to tighten up in the next two decades and grow fewer crops.
There simply won’t be enough water to sustain present irrigation in the San Joaquin Valley.
Groundwater is dangerously depleted. Wells are drying up and the land is sinking in many places, cracking canals. Surface water supplies have been cut back because of drought, and future deliveries are uncertain due to climate change and environmental regulations.
We’ve known all this for years, but long-term projections have become even more grim, according to a new study by the Public Policy Institute of California.
“We found that annual water supplies could decline by 20% by 2040,” PPIC experts wrote. That would mean around 3.2 million acre-feet — almost the amount giant Oroville Dam can hold in California’ second-largest reservoir.
For many generations, Californians have taken pride in the state’s bountiful harvests of fruits, vegetables, nuts and wine grapes. We’re envied by the nation for our production of varied foods — from avocados to almonds, from peaches to pistachios, from okra to oranges.
But by the end of this century, will agriculture still be robust?
Agriculture is water intensive. And water is becoming increasingly worrisome in the West, particularly with overuse of the Colorado River. There’s plenty of water off our coast, but we’ve only begun to dip our toe into desalination.
PPIC researchers offered a glimmer of hope for the San Joaquin Valley. With government teamwork — local, state and federal — and agriculture itself, the financial blow could be lightened, they said.
That would mean loosening the rules on farmers selling their entitled water to other growers. There’d also need to be investments in infrastructure to import additional water supplies.
But realistically all that seems iffy given California’s historic water wars. Selling water means taking it from one crop and pouring it on another. And most new supplies would come from other interests — such as farmers to the north or the coastal salmon fishing industry.
Compromising probably would require money — perhaps tax money — to pay farmers to fallow their land and governments to build new canals and repair old ones.
Growers and local irrigation districts would need to write checks.
“Locals need to have skin in the game. Everybody’s always happy to have someone else pay for their crops,” says Ellen Hanak, vice president and director of the PPIC Water Policy Center.
The PPIC found that at least 500,000 acres of San Joaquin Valley cropland will need to be fallowed in the next 20 years. The institute initially calculated that figure four years ago. But now it’s considered a best-case scenario, requiring an additional 1 million acre-feet of water.
“Needless to say, this would be a very heavy lift,” the researchers wrote.
A more likely scenario, the PPIC says, would be to expand water supplies by 500,000 acre-feet annually and wind up being forced to fallow about 650,000 acres.
But even half a million more acre-feet of water seems wishful.
The worst-case scenario would be losing 3.2 million acre-feet of water and fallowing nearly 900,000 acres, one-fifth of currently irrigated land.
Plan on it. Prepare to plant solar panels.
The biggest reason farmers face a severe water shortage is that for decades they’ve over-pumped aquifers. And government didn’t have the guts to stop them.
Finally in 2014, California became the last Western state to begin regulating groundwater use — but very slowly. By law, groundwater usage doesn’t have to become sustainable for 20 years.
Meanwhile, farmers have been drilling deeper and faster to extract water — not necessarily even their own — before they’re restricted by law.
“The real promise of the groundwater act is making sure people are not using groundwater they shouldn’t,” Hanak says. “If you use someone else’s surface water you’re going to court. But with groundwater, no one has been minding the shop.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom and water officials everywhere talk optimistically about recharging aquifers. Great idea. But first you need to find the water for recharging.
That can come from rare mega-storms, as we had in January. But there need to be facilities for moving the rampaging water and rules that permit it.
The water can be pumped onto barren land — storm or not — and allowed to sink into the ground. But a landowner must agree.
Here’s an idea: Turn barren, fallowed cropland into wetlands that recharge aquifers. Nurture wildlife. California lost 95% of its wetlands in the last century.
Climate change may also reduce available surface water.
Hotter, drier air may cause snowpacks to evaporate or soak into the mountaintops before the water can flow down into reservoirs. Or Sierra snow may melt quickly and descend in torrents so fast it can’t be captured in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
It’s all guesswork now.
PPIC researchers also predicted increased environmental restrictions on water in an effort to protect salmon and other fish.
I wouldn’t bet on that. Farm interests tend to outmuscle fish interests.
Newsom, for example, is trying to waive environmental rules aimed at keeping juvenile salmon alive in the delta. He wants more water to be stored for farmers.
Some footnotes:
The San Joaquin Valley produces more than half of California’s agriculture. The wetter Sacramento Valley produces nearly one-fourth. Together they make up the Central Valley.
Agriculture uses 80% of California’s developed water. The rest goes to domestic use — business and residential.
But agriculture generates only about 2% of the state’s gross product, down from 5% 60 years ago. It’s 14% of the San Joaquin Valley’s gross domestic product.
Three of my solutions:
Plant fewer thirsty crops, such as almonds that have proliferated.
Expedite groundwater regulations and aquifer recharging.
How Climate Change Is Making Tampons (and Lots of Other Stuff) More Expensive
Coral Davenport – February 18, 2023
Cotton left over after the harvest in Meadow, Texas, Jan. 19, 2023. (Jordan Vonderaar/The New York Times)
When the Agriculture Department finished its calculations last month, the findings were startling: 2022 was a disaster for upland cotton in Texas, the state where the coarse fiber is primarily grown and then sold around the globe in the form of tampons, cloth diapers, gauze pads and other products.
In the biggest loss on record, Texas farmers abandoned 74% of their planted crops — nearly 6 million acres — because of heat and parched soil, hallmarks of a megadrought made worse by climate change.
That crash has helped to push up the price of tampons in the United States 13% over the past year. The price of cloth diapers spiked 21%. Cotton balls climbed 9%, and gauze bandages increased by 8%. All of that was well above the country’s overall inflation rate of 6.5% in 2022, according to data provided by the market research firms NielsonIQ and The NPD Group.
It’s an example of how climate change is reshaping the cost of daily life in ways that consumers might not realize.
West Texas is the main source of upland cotton in the United States, which in turn is the world’s third-biggest producer and largest exporter of the fiber. That means the collapse of the upland cotton crop in West Texas will spread beyond the United States, economists say, onto store shelves around the world.
“Climate change is a secret driver of inflation,” said Nicole Corbett, a vice president at NielsonIQ. “As extreme weather continues to impact crops and production capacity, the cost of necessities will continue to rise.”
Halfway around the world in Pakistan, the world’s sixth-largest producer of upland cotton, severe flooding, made worse by climate change, destroyed half that country’s cotton crop.
There have been other drags on the global cotton supply. In 2021, the United States banned imports of cotton from the Xinjiang region of China, a major cotton-producing area, out of concerns about the use of forced labor.
But experts say that the impact of the warming planet on cotton is expanding across the planet with consequences that may be felt for decades to come.
By 2040, half of the regions around the globe where cotton is grown will face a “high or very high climate risk” from drought, floods and wildfires, according to the nonprofit group Forum for the Future.
Texas cotton offers a peek into the future. Scientists project that heat and drought exacerbated by climate change will continue to shrink yields in the Southwest — further driving up the prices of many essential items. A 2020 study found that heat and drought worsened by climate change have already lowered the production of upland cotton in Arizona and projected that future yields of cotton in the region could drop by 40% between 2036 and 2065.
Cotton is “a bellwether crop,” said Natalie Simpson, an expert in supply chain logistics at the University at Buffalo. “When weather destabilizes it, you see changes almost immediately,” Simpson said. “This is true anywhere it’s grown. And the future supply that everyone depends on is going to look very different from how it does now. The trend is already there.”
Return of the Dust Bowl
For decades, the Southwestern cotton crop has depended on water pumped from the Ogallala Aquifer, which stretches underneath eight western states from Wyoming to Texas.
But the Ogallala is declining, in part because of climate change, according to the 2018 National Climate Assessment, a report issued by 13 federal agencies. “Major portions of the Ogallala Aquifer should now be considered a nonrenewable resource,” it said.
That is the same region that was abandoned by more than 2 million people during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s, caused by severe drought and poor farming practices. John Steinbeck famously chronicled the trauma in his epic “The Grapes of Wrath,” about a family of cotton farmers driven from their Oklahoma home. Lately, the novel has been weighing on the mind of Mark Brusberg, a meteorologist at the Agriculture Department.
“The last time this happened, there was a mass migration of producers from where they couldn’t survive any longer to a place where they were going to give it a shot,” Brusberg said. “But we have to figure out how to keep that from happening again.”
In the years since, the farmland over the Ogallala once again flourished as farmers drew from the aquifer to irrigate their fields. But now, with the rise in heat and drought and the decline of the aquifer, those dust storms are returning, the National Climate Assessment found. Climate change is projected to increase the duration and intensity of drought over much of the Ogallala region in the next 50 years, the report said.
Barry Evans, a fourth-generation cotton farmer near Lubbock, Texas, doesn’t need a scientific report to tell him that. Last spring, he planted 2400 acres of cotton. He harvested 500 acres.
“This is one of the worst years of farming I’ve ever seen,” he said. “We’ve lost a lot of the Ogallala Aquifer, and it’s not coming back.”
When Evans began farming cotton in 1992, he said, he was able to irrigate about 90% of his fields with water from the Ogallala. Now that’s down to 5% and declining, he said. He has been growing cotton in rotation with other crops and using new technologies to maximize the precious little moisture that does arrive from the skies. But he sees farmers around him giving up.
“The decline of the Ogallala has had a strong impact on people saying it’s time to retire and stop doing this,” he said.
Kody Bessent, the CEO of Plains Cotton Growers Inc., which represents farmers who grow cotton across 4 million acres in Texas, said that land would produce 4 or 5 million bales of cotton in a typical year. Production for 2022 is projected at 1.5 million bales — a cost to the regional economy of roughly $2 billion to $3 billion, he said.
“It’s a huge loss,” he said. “It’s been a tragic year.”
From Cotton Fields to Walmart Shelves
Upland cotton is shorter and coarser than its more famous cousin, Pima cotton. It is also far more widely grown and is the staple ingredient in cheap clothes and basic household and hygiene products.
In the United States, most cotton grown is upland cotton, and the crop is concentrated in Texas. That’s unusual for a major commodity crop. While other crops such as corn, wheat and soybeans are affected by extreme weather, they are spread out geographically so that a major event afflicting some of the crop may spare the rest, said Lance Honig, an economist at the Agriculture Department.
“That’s why cotton really stands out, with this drought having such a big impact on the national crop,” Honig said.
Sam Clay of Toyo Cotton Co., a Dallas trader that buys upland cotton from farmers and sells it to mills, said the collapse of the crop had sent him scrambling. “Prices have gone sky-high, and all this is getting passed on to consumers,” he said.
Clay said he is experiencing the impacts himself. “I bought six pairs of Wranglers a year and a half ago for $35 a pair. I’m paying $58 a pair now.”
At least 50% of the denim in every pair of Wrangler and of Lee jeans is woven from U.S.-grown cotton, and the cost of that cotton can represent more than half the price tag, said Jeff Frye, the vice president of sustainability for Kontoor Brands, which owns both labels.
Frye and others who deal in denim did point out, however, that other factors have driven up price, including the ban on imports of Xinjiang cotton, high fuel costs and the complicated logistics of moving materials.
Among the cotton products most sensitive to the price of raw materials are personal care items like tampons and gauze bandages, since they require very little labor or processing like dying, spinning or weaving, said Jon Devine, an economist at Cotton Inc., a research and marketing company.
The price of Tampax, the tampon giant that sells 4.5 billion boxes globally each year, started climbing fast last year.
In an earnings call in January, Andre Schulten, chief financial officer for Procter & Gamble, which makes Tampax, said the costs of raw materials “are still a significant headwind” for the company across several products, forcing the company to raise prices.
On a recent Sunday at a Walmart in Alexandria, Virginia, several shoppers said they had noticed rising prices.
“The price of a regular box of Tampax has gone up from $9 to $11,” said Vanessa Skelton, a consultant and the mother of a 3-year-old. “That’s a regular monthly expense.”
Make Way for Polyester
Cotton farmers say that Washington can help by increasing aid in the farm bill, legislation that Congress is renewing this year.
Taxpayers have sent Texas cotton farmers an average of $1 billion annually over the past five years in crop insurance subsidies, according to Daniel Sumner, an agricultural economist at the University of California, Davis.
Farmers say they’d like expanded funding for disaster relief programs to cover the impact of increasingly severe drought and to pay farmers for planting cover crops that help retain soil moisture. They also say they hope that advances in genetically modified seeds and other technologies can help sustain Texas cotton.
But some economists say it may not make sense to continue support a crop that will no longer be viable in some regions as the planet continues to warm.
“Since the 1930s, government programs have been fundamental to growing cotton,” Sumner said. “But there’s not a particular economic argument to grow cotton in West Texas as the climate changes. Does it make any economic sense for a farm bill in Washington, D.C., to say, ‘West Texas is tied to cotton?’ No, it doesn’t.”
In the long run, it could just mean that cotton is no longer the main ingredient in everything from tampons to textiles, said Sumner, “and we’re all going to use polyester.”
As the Colorado River shrinks, federal officials consider overhauling Glen Canyon Dam
Ian James – February 18, 2023
The Colorado River’s decline threatens hydropower at Glen Canyon Dam. Now, officials are looking at retooling the dam to deal with low water levels. (Joshua Lott / Washington Post)
The desiccation of the Colorado River has left Lake Powell, the country’s second-largest reservoir, at just 23% of capacity, its lowest level since it was filled in the 1960s.
With the reservoir now just 32 feet away from “minimum power pool” — the point at which Glen Canyon Dam would no longer generate power for six states — federal officials are studying the possibility of overhauling the dam so that it can continue to generate electricity and release water at critically low levels.
A preliminary analysis of potential modifications to the dam emerged during a virtual meeting held by the federal Bureau of Reclamation, which is also reviewing options for averting a collapse of the water supply along the river. These new discussions about retooling the dam reflect growing concerns among federal officials about how climate change is contributing to the Colorado River’s reduced flows, and how declining reservoirs could force major changes in dam management for years to come.
Among the immediate concerns is the threat of the reservoir dropping below the dam’s power-generating threshold. If that were to occur, water would only flow through four 8-foot-wide bypass tubes, called the outlet works, which would create a chokepoint with reduced water-releasing capacity.
“There is now an acknowledgment, unlike any other time ever before, that the dam is not going to be suited to 21st century hydrology,” said Kyle Roerink, executive director of the environmental group Great Basin Water Network, who listened to the meeting. “They’re not sugarcoating that things have to change there, and they have to change pretty quickly.”
Those who participated in the Feb. 7 meeting included dozens of water mangers, representatives of electric utilities, state officials and others. They discussed proposals such as penetrating through the dam’s concrete to make new lower-level intakes, installing a new or reconfigured power plant, and tunneling a shaft around either side of the dam to a power plant, among other options.
The Interior Department declined a request for an interview, but spokesperson Tyler Cherry said in email that the briefing was part of broader conversations with state officials, tribal leaders, water managers and others “to inform our work to improve and protect the short-term sustainability of the Colorado River System and the resilience of the American West to a changing climate.”
Roerink and two other people who listened to the webinar told The Times that cost estimates for several alternatives ranged from $500 million to $3 billion. The agency will need congressional approval and will have to conduct an environmental review to analyze options.
The Bureau of Reclamation’s presentation, given by regional power manager Nick Williams, included some additional alternatives that wouldn’t require major structural modifications of the dam. Those options included adjusting operations to maximize power generation at low reservoir levels, studying ways of using the existing intakes at lower water levels, and making up for the loss of hydroelectric power by investing in solar or wind energy.
Glen Canyon Dam stands 710 feet tall, anchored to the canyon’s reddish sandstone walls in northern Arizona, about 320 miles upstream from Lake Mead, the nation’s largest reservoir. The dam has been controversial since its inception, with environmental activists and others arguing the reservoir was unnecessary and destroyed the canyon’s pristine ecosystem.
Lake Powell and Lake Mead have declined over the last 23 years during the most severe drought in centuries. Federal officials have sought to boost Powell’s levels in recent months by reducing the amount of water they release downstream until the spring runoff arrives. They’ve said they may need to further cut water releases.
A central concern is that if the water drops below minimum power pool — 3,490 feet above sea level under the current operating rules — the main intakes would need to be shut down and water would instead flow through the dam’s lower bypass tubes. Because of those tubes’ reduced capacity, that could lead to less water passing downstream, shrinking the river’s flow in the Grand Canyon and accelerating the decline of Lake Mead toward “dead pool” — the point at which water would no longer pass through Hoover Dam to Arizona, California and Mexico.
Federal officials prepared the initial studies of alternatives for Glen Canyon Dam using $2 million that the Bureau of Reclamation secured as part of $200 million for drought response efforts.
According to a slide presentation shown at the meeting, officials see potential hazards in some of the six alternatives. Piercing the dam’s concrete to create new low-level or mid-level intakes, for example, would entail “increased risk from penetration through dam,” the presentation says.
They also describe risks due to possible “vortex formation,” or the creation of whirlpools above horizontal intakes as the water level declines. Their formation could cause damage if air is pulled into the system. The presentation says one alternative would involve lowering the minimum power pool limit and possibly installing structures on the intakes to suppress whirlpools, but it said this still would not allow for the water level to go much lower.
One of the possible fixes includes installing a new power plant that would generate electricity with water flowing from the bypass tubes, or taking a similar approach using existing infrastructure. Another would involve excavating a tunnel to the left or right side of the dam, and installing a power plant underground or in the riverbed.
Other options include changing operations at both Glen Canyon and Hoover dams “to maximize power generation under low flow conditions using existing infrastructure.”
“Any of the options are going to be very expensive and they’re going to be very time-consuming,” said Leslie James, executive director of the Colorado River Energy Distributors Assn., who participated in the meeting.
James praised the Bureau of Reclamation for “starting the processes to look at structural options like this.”
“I see what they’re doing here as getting an early start and at least evaluating everything that they can to look and see what may be feasible,” James said. She said she hopes Congress will provide the necessary funding to ensure continued electricity flowing from Glen Canyon Dam, given “how important hydropower is to entire communities.”
Her association represents nonprofit electric utilities that buy power produced by Glen Canyon Dam and other dams that are part of the Colorado River Storage Project. The association includes members in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming. The utilities supply power in cities, rural areas, irrigation districts and tribal communities.
Power from the dam has long been a vital energy source, though its output has decreased dramatically in recent years as Lake Powell has declined. During the 2022 fiscal year, Glen Canyon Dam generated 2,591 gigawatt-hours of electricity, enough to power more than 240,000 average homes for a year.
James said electric utilities across the region have had to make up for the reduced hydropower by turning to other costlier sources.
“It’s a real challenging time,” James said. “And it is the people in these communities that are ultimately being impacted with higher electricity bills.”
Lake Powell’s level is projected to rise this spring with runoff from the above-average snowpack in the Rocky Mountains. But that boost in water levels is expected to have a limited effect on the deep water deficit that has accumulated over more than two decades.
And in the long term, scientific research indicates warming and drying will continue to take a major toll on the river.
Scientists have found that roughly half the decline in the river’s flow since 2000 has been caused by higher temperatures, that climate change is driving the aridification of the Southwest, and that for each additional 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming, the river’s average flow will probably decrease about 9%.
Environmental activists have for years urged the federal government to consider draining Lake Powell, decommissioning the dam and storing the water downstream in Lake Mead.
Activists who listened to the Bureau of Reclamation’s presentation said they welcome the agency’s examination of the issues at Glen Canyon Dam but would prefer to see a broader analysis that evaluates other options, including draining the reservoir.
In a report last year, Roerink’s Great Basin Water Network and two other groups warned that the “antiquated plumbing system inside Glen Canyon Dam represents a liability to Colorado River Basin water users who may quickly find themselves in legal jeopardy and water supply shortfalls.”
“The bureau is admitting that the dam is a liability,” Roerink said. “From my perspective, that’s a good first step.”
Beyond the current focus on trying to prop up hydropower generation, Roerink said, “I think we need an option that is just a bypass option without a power plant at the end of it.”
Roerink said he expects there will be a lot of debate about issues such as evaporation from the reservoir and the high costs of modifications to the dam.
“Is it all worth it? Are the taxpayer dollars going to be worth it for those electrons?” Roerink said. “How long will it be until this just proves itself to be a futile exercise?”
John Weisheit, an activist who has advocated for removing the dam, said he was delighted to hear federal officials openly discussing these options for the first time.
“I’m glad we’re having this conversation. It’s long overdue,” said Weisheit, who is co-founder of the group Living Rivers.
Weisheit said he also thinks the agency’s alternatives aren’t broad enough, and leave unanswered questions about the dam’s life span.
“I think it’s imperative that we know exactly what the life span of this dam is,” Weisheit said. “There is so much more that needs to be discussed.”
Weisheit said one major concern should be the accumulation of sediments in the bottom of the reservoir, which, according to a recent federal survey, has lost nearly 6.8% of its water-storing capacity.
Another issue with the agency’s current alternatives, he said, is that they wouldn’t solve problems of intakes or bypass tubes sucking in air at low water levels, “just like everybody’s bathtub does,” potentially causing cavitation that would pit and tear into metal, damaging the infrastructure.
Weisheit said he also was concerned about potential threats to endangered fish in the Grand Canyon.
Overall, the modifications to the dam that the federal government is considering would be “too much investment for very little return,” Weisheit said. “And it’s going to take a long, long time.”
Weisheit said he favors the option of investing in solar and wind energy. Instead of spending up to $3 billion trying to squeeze a shrinking amount of power from the dam, he said, “you can build a lot of solar cells and turbines,” including nearby on the Navajo Nation, which needs electricity.
Weisheit said he thinks the situation shows Glen Canyon Dam isn’t needed.
“Take the dam out,” he said, “because it’s not the right dam for climate change.”
Water crisis in West: Massive reservoir Lake Powell hits historic low water level
Colorado River Basin water levels drop to historic low, states mandated to cut use More water is being taken from the river than it can provide.
Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY – February 18, 2023
Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir and one that provides water and power to millions of people in southern California, has reached its lowest levels since its first filling in the 1960s.
Its companion reservoir, Lake Mead, is at levels almost as low.
Together, these reservoirs, fed by the mighty Colorado River, provide the water 40 million Americans depend on. Despite the storms that brought heavy rain and snow to California and other Western states in January, experts say it would take years of such weather to replenish the West’s water resources.
“In the year 2000, the two reservoirs were 95% full. They’re roughly 25% full now,” said Brad Udall, a water and climate scientist at Colorado State University. “It’s hard to overstate how important the Colorado River is to the entire American southwest.”
What to know about the West’s ongoing water crisis:
An abandoned and once-sunken boat sits along the shoreline of Lake Powell in this May 2022 file photo. The white ring above shows how high the water level was when the lake was full.
What is Lake Powell?
Lake Powell is the nation’s second-largest reservoir. It was created by blocking the Colorado River at Glen Canyon in southern Utah and northern Arizona.
It stores water as part of the Colorado River Compact and produces electricity through the hydroelectric turbines in Glen Canyon dam.
Work on the dam that created Lake Powell began in 1956 and was finished in 1966. It took 16 years for it to fill. At its highest, in 1983, the lake was 3,708 feet above sea level.
Lake Powell hasn’t been this low since June of 1965, just two years after it began to fill with water.
The biggest worry: If the lake’s level falls much lower, it won’t be possible to get water out of it.
Why? Tubes that run water through its out of the lake and into eight hydroelectric turbines could soon be above the water. There are bypass tubes available below that point, but they weren’t designed for continuous use, so it’s not clear how they would fare.
Important quote: “If you can’t get water out of the dam, it means everyone downstream doesn’t get water,” said Udall. “That includes agriculture, cities like Los Angeles, San Diego and Phoenix.”
Will water stop flowing? “That’s a doomsday scenario,” said Bill Hasencamp, Colorado River resources manager for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Before things get to that point the Department of the Interior will require reductions in use.
How long until water stops flowing downstream? If the lake falls another 32 feet – about the amount it fell in the past year – power generation concerns become more urgent, Udall said. Snowmelt this spring is forecast to bring levels up somewhat.
Why is the water level so low?
The water in Lake Powell is low because the amount of water in the Colorado River has been falling for decades. At the same time, demand has risen due to increased population growth in the West.
Overall, the river’s flow is down 20% in this century relative to the 20th century.
More than four scientific studies have pinned a large part of the decline on human climate change. It’s partly that there’s less rain and snow, partly that as temperatures rise, plants use more water and more water evaporates out of the soil which would otherwise have ended up in the river. In addition, the river itself experiences more evaporation.
“It’s unfortunate that the largely natural occurrence of a drought has coincided with this increasing warming due to greenhouse gases,” said Flavio Lehner, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Cornell University. “That has brought everything to a head much earlier than people thought it would.”
What about Lake Mead and the Hoover Dam?
Lake Mead is the nation’s largest reservoir, a companion to Lake Powell. Mead was created when the Hoover Dam was completed in 1935. It supplies water and power to Arizona, California, New Mexico and Mexico.
Lake Mead’s level is 1,047 feet above sea level. You would have to go back to April of 1937, also two years into its initial filling, to find levels that low. It is forecast to have a new record low next summer, said Hasencamp.
The lake isn’t low enough yet to cause concerns about getting water out, but any hope of it refilling is years away, if ever, due to lowered rain and snow and increasing evaporation.
Some of America’s largest cities depend on the water from Lake Mead. “It’s 90% of the water supply to Las Vegas, 50% to Phoenix, effectively 100% to Tucson and 25% to Los Angeles,” said Udall.
What will happen if water levels keep dropping?
The Department of the Interior had asked the seven states of the Colorado River Compact to come up with a plan to cut between 2 and 4 million acre-feet of water by January. They weren’t able to come up with an agreement.
Because of that, it’s expected that the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees water management, will mandate one sometime next year.
“This is apparently a decent (water) year, but still, if it turns dry again there are some pretty big reductions on tap and every state could be affected,” said Hasencamp.
It will be painful but it doesn’t mean the area can’t thrive.
“The West might look different,” said Hasencamp. “You might not see the lush lawns of today and endless fields of alfalfa, but you will see thriving communities and agricultural regions.”
Feral cows to be gunned down by shooters in helicopters in US national forest
Jon Haworth – February 17, 2023
Feral cows roaming wild around southwest New Mexico will be gunned down by shooters in helicopters beginning next week, according to a plan approved by U.S. officials.
About 150 feral cattle, which authorities say “are not domesticated animals and pose a significant threat to public safety and natural resources,” will be hunted by “aerial shooting” and will take place over four days beginning Thursday, Feb. 23 at the Gila National Forest, according to the U.S. Forest Service.
A closure order has been issued in the area of operations of the 3.3 million acre reserve in southwest New Mexico and the public has been asked to avoid the area completely while the culling takes place.
“This has been a difficult decision, but the lethal removal of feral cattle from the Gila Wilderness is necessary to protect public safety, threatened and endangered species habitats, water quality, and the natural character of the Gila Wilderness,” said Camille Howes, Gila National Forest Supervisor. “The feral cattle in the Gila Wilderness have been aggressive towards wilderness visitors, graze year-round, and trample stream banks and springs, causing erosion and sedimentation. This action will help restore the wilderness character of the Gila Wilderness enjoyed by visitors from across the country.”
Authorities say that this is the most “efficient and humane way” to deal with the animals and that Gila National Forest officials are working closely together with the USDA Animal and and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) on this operation.
“All dispatched cattle will be left onsite to naturally decompose,” read a statement detailing the confirmation of the cattle removal from the U.S. Forest Service. “Forest Service staff will ensure no carcasses are adjacent to or in any waterbody or spring, designated hiking trail, or known culturally sensitive area. A wilderness minimum requirements decision guide has been completed and approved before using any methods otherwise prohibited under the Wilderness Act.”
PHOTO: Stock image of Gila National Forest where feral cows roaming wild around southwest New Mexico will be gunned down by shooters in helicopters beginning Feb. 23, 2023, according to a plan approved by U.S. officials. (U.S. Forest Service)
Forest officials say that some cattle growers have expressed concern to them that non-feral branded cattle could have strayed into the Gila National Forest due to fences and water gaps that were damaged during an unusually strong monsoon season over the past several months.
“The Forest Service is committed to continued efforts toward collaborative solutions and will continue to coordinate with permittees in their efforts to locate, gather, and remove their branded cattle from areas where they are not authorized,” officials said.
The issue regarding the feral cattle has been ongoing since the 1990s, according to the official decision memorandum released on Thursday, and several hundred cattle were destroyed between 1996 and 1998 in an effort to control the growing population.
In fact, in the past 25 years, the forest has issued a total of nine contracts that have resulted in the removal of 211 cattle, with the last order coming a year ago in Feb. 2022 when 65 feral cattle were lethally removed. Authorities estimate that around 150 will be eliminated during the cull set to take place next week.
If branded cattle are lethally removed during gathering or aerial operations, U.S. Forest Service officials say the owner may request compensation by contacting the U.S. Forest Service, Southwestern Region or the Gila National Forest.
