Who will clean up Alaska’s ‘orphaned’ oil infrastructure?

Op-Ed: Who will clean up Alaska’s ‘orphaned’ oil infrastructure?

George Schaller and Martin Robards         September 8, 2020
A small herd of musk oxen roam the Arctic refuge’s coastal plain. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service / Associated Press).

 

You can feel the encroaching decay in the sides of buildings, in the limp remains of a once-proud drill rig slowly rusting into the waterlogged gravel and tundra. In the 1950’s, one of us, George, was part of the expedition that explored and then advocated for the formation of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. At that time, he worried the region would end up resembling the disrupted skylines and greasy sheens of Texas’s aging and abandoned oil fields.

More recently, we visited the sprawling spaghetti of pipelines, metallic shells of buildings and this defunct drill rig, now worrying that a legal and regulatory morass will bring George’s dystopian fears to fruition. There has been little formal preparation for what happens when oil ends, even as the Trump administration has announced plans to fast-track the auction of leases for drilling in pristine areas of the Arctic refuge, with similar plans for parts of the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.

If we ignore the costs for plugging and abandoning wells, dismantling and removing accompanying infrastructure, and fully restoring impacted tundra, we allow for a vast overestimate of the economic value of oil in these outstanding Arctic ecosystems. Unless the intent is to walk away and just leave the mess behind.

For generations, people arriving in Alaska have done just this. Alaska’s legacy of abandoned infrastructure and contaminants has wrought havoc on numerous remote sites, and for many communities. In our travels across the Arctic coastal plain, we encountered abandoned drill sites where metal shards and sun-bleached wood punctuate rotting gravel pads, the acrid smells a clear olfactory reminder of what should not be there.

In the absence of plugging and proper abandonment, fluids and gases left in wells and underground reservoirs can seep to the surface. Added to this chronic challenge are corrosion of well bores from salts and water, the settling of land and changes in the climate that contribute to erosion of the hard surface permafrost.

In a few decades, the bulk of revenues from Alaska’s North Slope will be dispersed, and this decaying industrial mess will be someone else’s problem, if it is dealt with at all.

The Government Accountability Office stated in 2002 that there were inadequacies in planning for the proper and effective cleanup of abandoned sites on the North Slope of Alaska. The GAO restated its concerns in 2003, 2010 and 2011. The Department of the Interior Inspector General in 2015 and the Congressional Research Service in 2018 echoed these concerns.

Other large oil fields, such as in Texas, Louisiana and California, do not offer much solace as the number of their “orphaned” wells grow. In Louisiana, there are over 4,000 abandoned and unplugged wells, many of them in deteriorating condition. Texas has over 6,000, and California another 5,500, that are abandoned or at high risk of becoming so. Thousands of inactive additional wells will likely add to these numbers as the years tick by.

The decline in oil prices since 2014 has exacerbated the trend of well abandonment, particularly among smaller operators who may also be facing bankruptcy. These declines further reduce the already-inadequate revenues allocated to cleanup funds for these abandoned sites.

Alaska is starting to experience these pressures. The bankruptcy of Aurora Gas in 2018 left the state the responsible party for cleaning up three wells on state land. Recent news that BP is closing shop in Alaska and selling to the smaller Hilcorp is consistent with this trajectory.

Decommissioning costs cannot be an afterthought. The Bureau of Land Management spent $90 million in northern Alaska, remediating just 18 of 136 “legacy wells” that the federal government drilled between 1944 and 1981. On Alaska’s North Slope, cleanup of a 60-acre oil-field logistics site ran up a $2-million bill and is still not complete. There are now over 3,000 active wells on the North Slope and another 800 suspended or idle, linked by a labyrinth of pipes, buildings and gravel roads.

Current bonding levels, the funds put aside by the industry to ensure adequate decommissioning of wells and other infrastructure, barely touch what’s needed for cleaning up what’s been built or drilled to date. Former State Commissioner Cathy Foerster previously expressed doubt that the bonds would “even pay for the engineering study needed to plan the plugging operations, much less any of the actual plugging costs” — and these plugging costs are just one small component of cleaning up the accumulated debris of a specific drill site, never mind the new oil fields that continue to sprawl outward from the Prudhoe Bay hub. Operators can hold blanket bonds for their entire operations that may not even cover a single site’s cleanup.

There has been reticence from the industry and regulators to absorb the burdens of decommissioning at the outset. However, if the state of Alaska or other local representatives do not insist on a bond to cover all costs of potential cleanup and restoration prior to approval of an operation, experience in North America and around the world strongly suggests it will not be done.

If we cannot afford a plan to fully clean up and restore an area, this is just one more of the many reasons why we cannot afford to drill new wells.

George Schaller is a senior conservationist at the Wildlife Conservation Society. Martin Robards is regional director for the Arctic Beringia program at WCS.

Arctic warming: are record temperatures and fires arriving earlier than scientists predicted?

The Conversation

Arctic warming: are record temperatures and fires arriving earlier than scientists predicted?

Christopher J White, Senior Lecturer in Water & Environmental Engineering, University of Strathclyde            September 8, 2020
LuYago / Shutterstock

 

It was a grim record. On June 20 2020, the mercury reached 38°C in Verkhoyansk, Siberia – the hottest it’s ever been in the Arctic in recorded history. With the heatwaves came fire, and by the start of August around 600 individual fires were being detected every year. By early September, parts of the Siberian Arctic had been burning since the second week of June.

CO₂ emissions from these fires increased by more than a third compared to 2019, according to scientists at the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service. The wildfires produced an estimated 244 megatons of CO₂ between January and August, releasing thousands of years’ worth of stored carbon.

The summer of 2019 was already a record breaker for temperatures and fires across the Arctic. Seeing these events unfold again in 2020 – on an even larger scale – has the scientific community worried. What does it all mean for the Arctic, climate change and the rest of the world?

Sooner than predicted?

Even with climate change, the severe summer heatwave of 2020 was expected to occur, on average, less than once every 130 years. Wildfire observations in the Arctic are fairly limited prior to the mid-1990’s, but there is no evidence of similarly extreme fires in the years before routine monitoring started.

Higher temperatures globally are likely to be driving the increase in wildfire frequency and duration. But modelling wildfires is difficult. Climate models don’t predict wildfires, and they cannot indicate when future extreme events will occur year-on-year. Instead, climate modelers focus on whether they are able to predict the right conditions for events like wildfires, such as high temperatures and strong winds.

Read more: Siberia heatwave: why the Arctic is warming so much faster than the rest of the world

And these climate model projections show that the kind of extreme summer temperatures we’ve seen in the Arctic in 2020 weren’t likely to occur until the mid-21st century, exceeding predictions by decades.

So even though an increasing trend of high temperatures and conditions suitable for wildfires are predicted in climate models, it’s alarming that these fires are so severe, have occurred in the same region two years in a row, and were caused by conditions which weren’t expected until further in the future.

<span class="caption">The Arctic is warming at a faster rate than the global average.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="link rapid-noclick-resp" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/forest-fire-burned-trees-after-wildfire-501036100" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" data-ylk="slk:Yelantsevv/Shutterstock">Yelantsevv/Shutterstock</a></span>
The Arctic is warming at a faster rate than the global average. Yelantsevy / Shutterstock 
Climate feedback loops

So what is causing this rapid change? Over recent decades, temperatures in the most northerly reaches of Earth have been increasing at a faster rate than the rest of the world, with the polar region heating at more than twice the rate of the global average.

The fires caused by these hot, dry conditions are occurring in remote and sparsely populated forests, tundra and peat bogs, where there is ample fuel.

But these extreme events are also providing worrying evidence of climate “feedback loops”, which were predicted to happen as the climate warms. This is where increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere contribute to further warming by promoting events – like wildfires – which release even more greenhouse gas, creating a self-perpetuating process that accelerates climate change.

Read more: Arctic breakdown: what climate change in the far north means for the rest of us

Record CO2 emissions released from burning Arctic forests during the summer of 2020 will make future conditions even warmer. But ash and other particulates from the wildfires will eventually settle on the ice and snow, making them darker and accelerating their melting by reducing how easily their surface reflects sunlight.

Climate change is not the direct cause of this summer’s fires, but it is helping to create the right conditions for them. The extreme temperatures and wildfires seen throughout the Arctic in 2020 would have been almost impossible without the influence of human-induced climate change – and they are feeding themselves.

<span class="caption">Soot-stained ice absorbs more of the sun’s heat and melts more quickly.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="link rapid-noclick-resp" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/background-texture-dirty-spring-snow-soot-1674811552" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" data-ylk="slk:Trifonov Aleksey/Shutterstock">Trifonov Aleksey/Shutterstock</a></span>
Soot-stained ice absorbs more of the sun’s heat and melts more quickly. Trifonov Aleksey / Shutterstock 
What about the rest of the world?

When we think of the Arctic, we don’t tend to picture wildfires and heatwaves – we think of snow and ice and long, brutal winters. Yet the region is changing before our eyes. It’s too early to say whether the last two summers represent a permanent step-change, or new “fire regime”, for the Arctic. Only observations over a much longer timescale could confirm this.

But these record-breaking events in the Arctic are being fueled by human influences that are changing our world’s climate sooner than many expected. With climate models predicting a future where already hot and fire-prone areas are likely to become more so, 2020’s record temperatures paint a worrying trend towards more of the same.

The Arctic is at the frontline of climate change. What we are witnessing here first are some of the most rapid and intense effects of climate change. While the impact is devastating – record CO₂ emissions, damaged forests and soils, melting permafrost – these events may prove to be a portent of things to come for the rest of the world.

The Conversation
The Conversation: Christopher White receives funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), the Low Carbon Power and Energy Program, and various Australian and Tasmanian State Government research funding program.

Man who hasn’t visited a doctor for 70 years shares his two top tips for staying healthy

Man who hasn’t visited a doctor for 70 years shares his two top tips for staying healthy

Caroline Allen, Contributor                     September 8, 2020

The 87-year-old, pictured here, hasn't been to the doctors in 70 years because of his good health. (SWNS)
The 87-year-old, pictured here, hasn’t been to the doctors in 70 years because of his good health. (SWNS)

 

Bernard Lawes has never taken a day off sick.

In fact, Bernard says the last time he went to the doctors was in 1950, aged 18, to have a fitness test for the National Service.

And if there were two things Bernard would have to pick to explain his remarkable constitution it would be at least one hot meal a day and a good walk up the stairs.

According to Bernard, the key to good health really is as simple as that – although it may also have something to do with the fact he has never drank alcohol or smoked.

Lawes takes regular walks up the stairs of his church to stay in shape. (SWNS)
Lawes takes regular walks up the stairs of his church to stay in shape. (SWNS)

 

Not just any hot meal will do. The pensioner recommends “plain English food” such as chicken or beef.

He also puts his good health down to climbing 110 stairs three times a week in order to wind the clock at his local church.

Bernard says he has climbed the same steps each week for the past 44 years, accumulating a total of some 750,000 steps throughout his time as a volunteer.

Read more: Scientists may have uncovered key to slowing down the ageing process

Before retiring aged 60, he used to walk four miles to and from work each day to stay in good physical condition.

While many people opt for more strenuous forms of exercise, simply walking each day has numerous health benefits from building stamina to improving heart health.

“Everything I have ever needed has always been in walking distance,” Bernard, who has never owned a car, explains.

“When I tell people I’ve not been to the doctor in 70 years, they can never quite believe it.

“There’s no real secret, I think staying active all these years is the main reason behind it and having at least one good hot meal a day is important.

Bernard Lawes and his late wife Veronica. (SWNS)
Bernard Lawes and his late wife Veronica. (SWNS)

 

“I’ve always walked everywhere. You’ve got to keep active and going to meet people as well – that’s what life is all about.

“My time with the church must have helped to keep me fit with all those steps.

“It was 110 steps up and down the tower to wind the clock as well as clambering up an iron ladder which was as tall as a house.

“I only did it to help out one time and ended up winding the clock for the next 44 years.”

According to the NHS, keeping active is the key to staying fit, mobile and independent if you are elderly.

“Regular exercise can help reduce the impact of several diseases, for example osteoporosis, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease and stroke,” it says. “Regular exercise can also reduce arthritis related pain, improve sleep, prevent falls and fractures, and improve low mood and memory.

“In fact, taking regular exercise is one of the best things you can do to remain independent.”

Taking care of eyes and feet – which have doubtless come under a fair bit of strain over the decades – is also recommended.

Read more: 73-year-old works out six times per week

Bernard retired to care for his wife, Veronica, who died from kidney failure in 2014.

“I’ve lost most of my family members now but there’s no point moping around and feeling sorry for yourself – you have to get up and go out,” he said.

“We didn’t have any children so it’s important that I keep friends around me. Lockdown was tough, it was for everyone, but now I can get back into town.

“I walk down there then walk back, you meet people then, that’s what does it, meeting people.

“Over the years, I’ve played sports like football, bowls and cricket – I still enjoy a spot of gardening too. My garden is 80 yards long so there’s plenty to do.

“It’s just about getting out and about. If you just sit about doing nothing – that’s the worse possible thing you can do.”

Fox News Reporter Snaps Back As Trump Demands Her Firing For Confirming War Dead Story

Fox News Reporter Snaps Back As Trump Demands Her Firing For Confirming War Dead Story

Mary Papenfuss              September 5, 2020

Fox News reporter staunchly defended her work Saturday after President Donald Trump demanded she be fired for confirming parts of The Atlantic’s bombshell story revealing the president’s insults about military service members.

“I can tell you that my sources are unimpeachable,” Fox News’ national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin said on-air (in the video above). “I feel very confident with what we have reported at Fox.”

She didn’t confirm “every line” of the report, but did confirm “most of the descriptions and the quotes in that Atlantic article … so I feel very confident in my reporting,” Griffin said. She also discovered as part of her reporting that Trump had once said that including “wounded guys” would not be a “good look” at a Fourth of July parade honoring the military, according to a source.

The Atlantic article cited multiple accounts of shocking incidents when Trump denigrated military service members, including referring to fallen war heroes as “losers” and “suckers.” It also revealed details of the president’s refusal to visit the graves of America’s war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery while he was in France in 2018. Trump has denied everything.

Griffin said she wasn’t able to confirm the “suckers” and “losers” portion of the Atlantic report about dead military heroes. But a source did confirm that Trump once said that anyone who served in the Vietnam War was a “sucker.”

While reporters at other news operations confirmed the Atlantic report, Trump singled out Griffin because a hit from Fox News, which is usually supportive of the president, is particularly damaging for him.

Trump cited a Breitbart article pointing out that Griffin had failed to confirm the “most salacious” (“suckers” and “losers”) details of the Atlantic story, written by editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, whom Trump called a “slimeball.” The president also declared that Fox News was “gone.”

Fox News was confused about where it stood on the story Friday. News hosts bashed the story before it was confirmed (by Griffin), then it was bashed again, then reconfirmed. News hosts also attacked the use of anonymous sources by The Atlantic, but then used anonymous sources to attack — and confirm — the story.

At least seven of Griffin’s colleagues — and a Republican congressman — supported her after the president’s tweet and after being bashed by Fox contributor Mollie Hemingway for using anonymous sources.

Illinois GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger also spoke up for Griffin on Saturday, calling her “fair and unafraid.”

Twitter critics are calling on two retired Marine Corps generals — former Defense Secretary James Mattis and ex-White House chief of staff John Kelly — to speak out about the Atlantic article.

Former NATO supreme commander and Navy Admiral James Stavridis tweeted Friday that the men’s “lack of denial” speaks volumes.

 

Why Trump’s ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ slurs cut especially deep for Marines

The Week

Why Trump’s ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ slurs cut especially deep for Marines

Peter Weber, The Week           September 4, 2020

 

The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg dropped a bombshell on Washington, D.C., late Thursday, publishing a compilation of anecdotes about President Trump disparaging U.S. service members, frequently referring to those killed or captured in the line of duty as “losers” and “suckers.” Trump and his aides pushed back hard against the reports, but then James LaPorta, a Marine Corps veteran and investigative reporter at The Associated Pressgot confirmation from two sourcesThe Washington Post and The New York Times followed up with their own sources confirming Trump’s dismissive comments about POWs and slain soldiers.

Goldberg begins his article with Trump declining to visit the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018:

In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 Marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed. Belleau Wood is a consequential battle in American history, and the ground on which it was fought is venerated by the Marine Corps. America and its allies stopped the German advance toward Paris there in the spring of 1918. But Trump, on that same trip, asked aides, “Who were the good guys in this war?” [The Atlantic]

Goldberg’s report is “quite shocking,” LaPorta told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Thursday night. “I actually didn’t believe it — which is why I started reaching out to sources. … Belleau Wood is one of those things that is sort of hammered into young Marines as they’re going through boot camp. I mean, Marine Corps folklore comes out of Belleau Wood, the idea the German army called Marines ‘Teufel Hunden,’ which translates into ‘Devil Dog.’ That’s where we get that name from.”

Maddow also played a previously unseen part of her interview with Mary Trump in which the president’s niece recounts a family story about Trump threatening to disinherit Donald Trump Jr. if he joined the military.

Goldberg told MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Friday he thinks Pentagon officials are mostly baffled at Trump’s attitude toward military heroes. “I think he’s genuinely confused by service,” Goldberg said. “I think the volunteer force in particular kind of confuses him, because why would you ever possibly put your life at risk for a salary of $64,000 a year? It doesn’t make any sense, is my point, in his worldview.” Watch below.

 

Minivans at the Food Pantry: Meet America’s New Needy

The New York Times

Minivans at the Food Pantry: Meet America’s New Needy

Tim Arango                     September 4, 2020

LAKESIDE, Calif. — This is America: a family crammed in a minivan driving mile after mile across San Diego County, first to one food giveaway and then to another and then to more.

To Mary’s Donuts, in rustic downtown Lakeside, for day-old chocolate frosted, maple-and-bacon glazed and pastries the size of catcher’s mitts.

Sixteen miles west to Jewish Family Service for big, fresh mangoes, boxes of hard-boiled eggs, cheese and lamb stew. Another 20 minutes south to the Ocean Discovery Institute for diapers and school supplies. To the Salvation Army for bottled water, oatmeal, a cake. All of it piled high into the back.

Since the coronavirus pandemic upended her life and so many others’, Alexis Frost Cazimero has spent most days this way, gathering food for her four children as well as neighbors in need. She pulls her packed silver Volkswagen van alongside the BMWs and Mercedeses as they edge their way through the long, snaking food lines. Where else but America can luxury and poverty get so close together that, in essence, they become one?

“I want people to understand, the face of the needy is different now,” said Cazimero, who has joined a new class of Americans who never imagined they would have to take a spot in a modern-day bread line. “Just because I have a car doesn’t mean I have enough money to buy food.”

The pandemic has exposed the fragile nature of success for millions of Americans: material markers of outward stability, if not prosperity, but next to nothing to fall back on when times get tough.

In long conversations around the country in August — at kitchen tables, in living rooms and in cars during slow-moving food lines with rambunctious children in the back — Americans reflected on their new reality. The shame and embarrassment. The loss of choice in something as basic as what to eat. The worry over how to make sure their children get a healthy diet. The fear that their lives will never get back on track.

There was the family in Jackson, Mississippi, that relied on a local food bank over the summer, even though before the pandemic they had been making almost six figures a year. That is a nice living in a place like Jackson, and it got them a house in the leafy Belhaven neighborhood, a Chevy Suburban and beach vacations to Florida.

Or the single mother in Tennessee who had finally pushed her way into the middle class with a job that paid enough to send her oldest daughter to private school, only to find herself accepting food from charity.

Cazimero, 40, faced her new financial circumstances with as much equanimity as determination, even as it shook her sense of what it meant to have made it. Before the pandemic, she was a hair stylist at a salon owned by her mother-in-law that would shut down in accordance with California’s coronavirus rules. She also ran her own events business, which had been “rocking and rolling” after a lucrative holiday season decking out car dealerships for Christmas. Her husband, Adam, saw far fewer people come into the local Ford dealership where he works, and his commissions have plummeted.

These days she has become an armchair therapist to friends who feel ashamed at not being able to afford enough food; a logistics specialist in how she navigates the schedules of all the pantries in San Diego County; and a food procurer and distributor to the needy, even as she is needy herself.

“Before, I always helped out,” she said. “But I wasn’t the one who needed it. Now I need it.”

After making her rounds, Cazimero returned to her modest house in a development studding a hillside and separated out what will go to her family and what she will give away to neighbors and others. Over Facebook and text message groups, informal barter networks have sprouted among needy families. “You have toilet paper? Let’s trade,” she said.

And then there are the private messages from friends saying they need help but are embarrassed at not being able to provide for their families anymore.

She reminds them they are not the only ones. “Dude,” she said, “none of us can because we can’t work.”

‘The Great Depression With Minivans’

When historians look back on our pandemic-stricken times, there will perhaps be one indelible image that captures the attention of future generations: the endless lines of cars across the country filled with hungry Americans.

“I call it the Great Depression with minivans,” said Terry McNamara, who on a recent morning was behind the wheel in a line of cars, their trunks opened as they wound through the parking lot of Parma Senior High School in a working-class suburb of Cleveland that was once America’s fastest-growing city.

With his daughter, Laura Horsburgh, and five grandchildren along for the ride, McNamara, 74, drove his car through the procession as it moved along with military precision. At each station a coach or a teacher or even the principal loaded up the trunk with milk, or fresh produce from local farms — sometimes plump tomatoes or corn on the cob — or boxes of soup and lentils and cans of tuna. How much food one got depended on how many children were in the car. At the last stop, inside the school’s auto repair shop, volunteers offered watermelons and storybooks — Dr. Seuss and Berenstain Bears.

“The kids love to go and see what is new,” Horsburgh said.

The numbers of Americans seeking help from food banks have swelled despite an unprecedented expansion of the federal government’s food stamp program in the midst of the pandemic.

Just one food bank in Memphis, Tennessee, served more than 18,000 people between March and August, 10 times as many as over the same period last year.

“Folks who had really good jobs and were able to pay their bills and never knew how to find us,” said Ephie Johnson, the president and chief executive of Neighborhood Christian Centers. “A lot of people had finally landed that job, were helping their family and able to do a little better, and then this takes you out.” In her 30 years of charitable work in Memphis, she said, “I have not seen it quite like this.”

In one week in late July nearly 30 million Americans reported they did not have enough to eat, according to a government survey. Among households with children, 1 in 3 reported insufficient food, the highest level in the nearly two decades the government has tracked hunger in America, said Lauren Bauer, who studies food insecurity at the Brookings Institution.

“What’s happening with children right now is unprecedented in modern times,” Bauer said.

As painful as the summer was, as difficult as it became for so many families to afford decent food, the situation could get worse, especially with unemployment benefits drying up for many people and Washington unable to agree on a new stimulus package. Then there is the virus itself: It could surge back in the fall and shutter businesses again, putting more people out of work and into the food lines.

Feeding America, which oversees the country’s largest network of food banks and pantries, has projected that up to 54 million Americans could be food insecure before the end of the year, a 46% increase since the pandemic began. The group has reported a 60% increase in the number of people it serves and said that 4 in 10 people are first-time recipients of food aid.

During the pandemic, Feeding America’s volunteers have surveyed recipients, sending dispatches back to headquarters that read like raw intelligence reports from a nation in need.

“It was obvious that several people who came through our drive-through mobile pantry had never been to a pantry before,” reads one account from Terre Haute, Indiana.

In Cleveland, a woman who had once been prosperous enough to be a donor to the local food bank found herself on the receiving end, collecting food and also flowers on Mother’s Day.

In July, a report came back from New Orleans: “We have met so many people who are seeking the assistance from a food bank for the first time. In a ‘normal’ year, it’s not uncommon to hear someone say, ‘Six months ago, I never dreamed I’d need to ask for help getting food.’ But over the course of the pandemic response the number of people telling us has grown by magnitudes.”

What the numbers do not capture is the powerful emotions of shame or embarrassment that many say they feel, having fallen so suddenly into the lines of the desperate, and seeing so many hard-earned prizes of middle-class life — the nice car, the vacations, the ability to buy what they want when they want — fall away.

Ciara Jones, a single mother in Memphis, grew up poor but in recent years worked her way to economic stability. She was hired last year as a manager at Logan’s Roadhouse, a restaurant chain in the South, earning $60,000 a year — more money than she had ever made. She put her oldest daughter in a private Christian school, bought a new white Honda Accord and took her four children on vacation to Six Flags in St. Louis.

“I felt myself finally in the middle class,” Jones, 33, said.

Then the pandemic hit, and Logan’s closed, but not before she was allowed to take home T-bone steaks and chicken wings and hamburger patties from the restaurant’s freezer, which helped for a little while. And so did the extra $600 a week in unemployment she was receiving. But that has run out, and now she is receiving $275 per week in benefits, barely enough to cover her monthly rent of $975. She said she was ashamed to get food from Neighborhood Christian Centers and is embarrassed every time she pulls out her food stamp card at the grocery store.

“I’ve always been a strong woman, a strong mother,” she said. “I don’t want my kids to see me struggle or stressed.”

They Thought Poverty Was in the Rearview Mirror

The Belhaven neighborhood of Jackson, Mississippi, is filled with charming bungalows, stately old homes and canopied streets. Lily Victory lives in a small, white clapboard house on the edge of the neighborhood.

As a child, Victory was in foster care sometimes and grew up “super-poor,” she said. Food was always scarce. Her parents, she said, were too proud to apply for discounted lunches, so she never ate at school.

Before the pandemic, she worked as a contractor with the military. Her husband, Mike, is a machinist at a box factory, and together they earned a little less than $100,000 a year.

“We had nothing to worry about,” she said. “We had savings. We were saving up to put a down payment on a house. We took a couple vacations a year. The kids got whatever they wanted.”

After losing her job, and after her husband’s hours were cut, they were soon staring at an eviction notice. They were unable to make the $1,100 rent payment. The Chevy Suburban was one of the first things to go. Every day she awoke to a feeling of “impending doom.”

She called around to social service organizations and churches searching for help paying the rent. She was instead directed to a food bank, the Good Samaritan Center. Save the money you would spend on food and put it toward rent, she was told.

“I thought about a food bank and I was like, I don’t want to do that because if you are going to a food bank you really need it,” she said as she barely touched her lunch at a Mediterranean restaurant in Jackson. “I didn’t want to take it away from someone.”

She went anyway, as painful as it was.

“I lied to my children,” she said, her eyes unblinking.

To explain why there were so many things she did not normally buy — like cans of Coke and Sprite, or boxes of cupcakes — she told them they were a special treat because they were cooped up in the house. And to explain why she was not buying usual items like Lunchables, she said the shelves at the grocery store were bare because of the pandemic.

Amid Struggle, Gratitude and Silver Linings

As she drove from one food pantry to another in eastern San Diego County, Cazimero pointed out some of the businesses that have closed permanently. She passed through the center of El Cajon, her hometown, where she used to put up Christmas decorations at the promenade.

She was on her way to pass out doughnuts at a trailer community in the shadow of a busy freeway. Helping others find food, she said, has brought her purpose. She may have less money now, but she also has less anxiety. That is because she no longer is driven to exhaustion managing the children and work. There is no work anymore.

“I can go with less, and we have spent so much more valuable time as a family,” she said.

About 2,500 miles and three time zones away, in Erie, Pennsylvania, Claire Hudson, a single mother, lost her customer service job. For the first time, she went to a food bank. Like millions of Americans, she suddenly had little choice in what to eat, forced to accept whatever is boxed up and loaded in the trunk.

Many food banks offer fresh produce from local farms and prime cuts of meat. But giveaway boxes are often stuffed with bread and cakes and cookies.

“In the richest country in the world, and we are, we make it so easy to be unhealthy,” Cazimero said.

The crisis of food insecurity has further exposed how an unhealthy diet contributes to conditions like obesity and diabetes that put people at higher risk for complications from the virus.

With little choice, Hudson picked out what she and her son could use and donated the rest to those even more in need. She noticed a growing homeless population so started stuffing what she called “blessing bags” with sugary cereals like Froot Loops, graham crackers and pudding.

When she began handing them out to homeless people, she let them pick what they liked. “I started giving them a choice,” she said. “Hey, this is what I have, does any of this interest you? The choice for me came from not having a choice in what we got.”

Back in Ohio, Horsburgh, a stay-at-home mother, and her husband, Chris, a house painter whose jobs dwindled when the pandemic hit, worry plenty about money. But the children look forward to the weekly outings to the high school parking lot to pick up food — a routine in an uncertain time.

As the pandemic drags on, our understanding of the nature of the needy in the United States is changing, and with that change new questions abound: What is our responsibility to those who can barely hang on? Will we think differently about who has to ask for help and why?

Cazimero said she was trying to be optimistic: “Something great is going to come of this.”

But no one knows what the road back for so many families looks like — or if they can even make it back.

“You could grit and grind as a 19-year-old, until you get to 25 or 30, and you’re finally getting there,” said Johnson, the head of the charity in Memphis. “But at 30, 40 years old now you are trying to start over again? How are you going to do that? It’s hard.”

What is California’s wildfire smoke doing to our health? Scientists paint a bleak picture

What is California’s wildfire smoke doing to our health? Scientists paint a bleak picture

Erin McCormick in Berkeley                   September 4, 2020
<span>Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock</span>
Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock. Historic wildfires burning across California have sent a 500-mile-long gray blob of smoky air swirling above the western United States, and Stanford researcher Bibek Paudel is already seeing the health effects build up.

 

In the days after lightning sparked hundreds of fires across the north of thstate, Paudel, who studies respiratory illness at Stanford’s allergy and asthma research center, saw hospital admissuch as strokes jump by 23%. Based on the center’s studies of recent fires, Paudel expects that th

The research is part of a growing body of scientific evidence painting a dire picture of the effects of wildfire smoke on people, even those living hundreds of miles away. Many researchers worry that those debilitating effects will only intensify the risks of the Covid-19 pandemic. “Wildfire smoke can affect the health almost immediately,” said Dr Jiayun Angela Yao, an environmental health researcher in Canada.

Related: ‘An impossible choice’: farmworkers pick a paycheck over health despite smoke-filled air

This summer, Yao co-authored a study for the University of British Columbia showing that, within an hour of fire smoke descending upon the Vancouver area during recent wildfire seasons, the number of ambulance calls for asthma, chronic lung disease and cardiac events increased by 10%. The study found that within 24 hours greater numbers of people were calling for help with diabetic issues as well.

Studies after the bushfires that raged throughout Australia last year found even bleaker outcomes. Researchers from the University of Tasmania identified 417 extra deaths that occurred during 19 weeks of smoky air, and reported 3,100 more hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiac ailments and 1,300 extra emergency room visits for asthma.

The fires and the smoke are complicating the response to the coronavirus pandemic. Meanwhile, social distancing requirements are exacerbating the risks of smoke pollution. “For communities that are exposed to both fire smoke and Covid-19, it’s going to be a double threat,” Yao said.

<span class="element-image__caption">A satellite image shows smoke plumes from the California wildfires migrating across the American west.</span> <span class="element-image__credit">Photograph: Nasa/AFP/Getty Images</span>A satellite image shows smoke plumes from the California wildfires migrating across the American west. Photograph: Nasa/AFP/Getty Images

 

For health workers and first responders, dealing with both a pandemic and a fire season at the same time comes with significant logistical challenges. Evacuees and firefighters forced to live in shared housing may face additional Covid-19 exposure. The pandemic has already stretched the resources available from local government agencies thin.

Residents wanting to get away from the smoke may no longer have the option of sheltering at the library or mall or staying with friends because of shutdowns and pandemic risks. “We are not in a situation where people can just leave to get away from the smoke as they might like,” said Peter Lahm, an air resource specialist with the USDA Forest Service, who specializes in monitoring wildfire smoke.

Researchers also fear the smoke can act more deeply to hamper the body’s ability to fend off infection.

Science has long shown that air pollution can cause numerous deadly health effects, including increasing the severity of respiratory infections, such as flu and pneumonia. Research this year from Harvard University showed a significant link between increases in long-term exposure to air pollution particles and Covid death rates. The study, led by researcher Xiao Wu, has not yet been peer-reviewed.

Many US regions have managed to reduce pollution from industrial smokestacks and automobile tailpipes, but wildfire smoke has become an increasing threat.

Fire smoke is a volatile mixture of gases that can contain hundreds of different toxins, depending on the heat of the fire, the wind conditions and the composition of what is burning – whether it is trees, grasses or houses filled with plastics and manmade chemicals.

The spray of very fine particles – known as PM2.5 – that wildfires launch into the air causes the biggest concerns. These particles are small enough to be inhaled through the lungs, where they can cause disruptions to health that are just beginning to be fully understood.

“We know that pollution, in general, is going to make your immune system less healthy and its responses more chaotic,” said Dr Mary Prunicki, who oversees Stanford’s smoke studies as the director of research for the Sean N Parker Center for Allergy & Asthma Research. “It requires a healthy immune system to fight infections like Covid-19. And, if your immune system isn’t working as well, it puts you at greater risk.”

Prunicki and her team are working to learn more about how wildfire smoke affects the workings of the human body. Even as her own home was threatened with possible evacuation from Santa Clara county’s SCU Lightning Complex fires, Prunicki was working to send out more than 100 blood testing kits to volunteers for a study that researchers hope will help establish how conditions like inflammation are affected by the smoke.

<span class="element-image__caption">San Francisco is blanketed under a thick layer of unhealthy smoke-filled air.</span> <span class="element-image__credit">Photograph: Peter Dasilva/EPA</span>San Francisco is blanketed under a thick layer of unhealthy smoke-filled air. Photograph: Peter Dasilva/EPA

Earlier studies of young people, who were exposed to even distant wildfire smoke, showed dramatic changes.

“We found, even in teenagers, if we drew their blood after a wildfire, we saw a systematic increase in inflammatory markers,” said Prunicki, who added that “a lot of chronic disease is related to inflammation”.

With clouds of smoke from the fires floating around the country, people as far away as Idaho and Colorado are choking on California’s smoke. “We had several days when we were just socked in,” said Sally Hunter, an air specialist with the Idaho department of environmental quality, who said smoke travelled north to spark health warnings in Boise, even though there were no fires nearby. “I got up to go get groceries and I couldn’t see down to the end of my street. I got a headache and my sister in-law got itchy, watery eyes.”

Since California’s fires started months earlier than usual, experts worry that this will be an especially smoky year.

The worst year on record for California fire smoke was 2008 when lightning fires started in June and continued all summer, according to Lahm. Fires from 2017 and 2018 also unleashed huge amounts of smoke.

Paudel and the Stanford researchers found that, since 2011, the number of smoky days occurring each year has increased in California and in the entire western US. Unfortunately, some of the largest increases were in counties with the biggest population centers, such as those around Los Angeles or along California’s Central Valley.

When a gray curtain of smoke descended on the Bay Area last week, 76-year-old Berkeley resident Barbara Freeman, who suffers from pulmonary conditions, tried to follow all the advice. She regularly checked environmental air monitor readings, stayed inside, sealed her windows and turned on her two air cleaners.

Still Freeman lost her voice and found breathing painful. She worried, if she had to evacuate, she would have nowhere to turn to escape the smoke and the danger of coronavirus. But one of the things she found the hardest was not being able to go outside to walk her dog.

“That was how I was maintaining what sanity I had left,” she said.

Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

The Atlantic 

Donald Trump greets families of the fallen at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day 2017. CHIP SOMODEVILLA / GETTY

When President Donald Trump canceled a visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris in 2018, he blamed rain for the last-minute decision, saying that “the helicopter couldn’t fly” and that the Secret Service wouldn’t drive him there. Neither claim was true.

Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain, and because he did not believe it important to honor American war dead, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day. In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.

Belleau Wood is a consequential battle in American history, and the ground on which it was fought is venerated by the Marine Corps. America and its allies stopped the German advance toward Paris there in the spring of 1918. But Trump, on that same trip, asked aides, “Who were the good guys in this war?” He also said that he didn’t understand why the United States would intervene on the side of the Allies.

There was no precedent in American politics for the expression of this sort of contempt, but the performatively patriotic Trump did no damage to his candidacy by attacking McCain in this manner. Nor did he set his campaign back by attacking the parents of Humayun Khan, an Army captain who was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Trump remained fixated on McCain, one of the few prominent Republicans to continue criticizing him after he won the nomination. When McCain died, in August 2018, Trump told his senior staff, according to three sources with direct knowledge of this event, “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,” and he became furious, according to witnesses, when he saw flags lowered to half-staff. “What the fuck are we doing that for? Guy was a fucking loser,” the president told aides. Trump was not invited to McCain’s funeral. (These sources, and others quoted in this article, spoke on condition of anonymity. The White House did not return earlier calls for comment, but Alyssa Farah, a White House spokesperson, emailed me this statement shortly after this story was posted: “This report is false. President Trump holds the military in the highest regard. He’s demonstrated his commitment to them at every turn: delivering on his promise to give our troops a much needed pay raise, increasing military spending, signing critical veterans reforms, and supporting military spouses. This has no basis in fact.”)

Trump’s understanding of heroism has not evolved since he became president. According to sources with knowledge of the president’s views, he seems to genuinely not understand why Americans treat former prisoners of war with respect. Nor does he understand why pilots who are shot down in combat are honored by the military. On at least two occasions since becoming president, according to three sources with direct knowledge of his views, Trump referred to former President George H. W. Bush as a “loser” for being shot down by the Japanese as a Navy pilot in World War II. (Bush escaped capture, but eight other men shot down during the same mission were caught, tortured, and executed by Japanese soldiers.)

When lashing out at critics, Trump often reaches for illogical and corrosive insults, and members of the Bush family have publicly opposed him. But his cynicism about service and heroism extends even to the World War I dead buried outside Paris—people who were killed more than a quarter century before he was born. Trump finds the notion of military service difficult to understand, and the idea of volunteering to serve especially incomprehensible. (The president did not serve in the military; he received a medical deferment from the draft during the Vietnam War because of the alleged presence of bone spurs in his feet. In the 1990’s, Trump said his efforts to avoid contracting sexually transmitted diseases constituted his “personal Vietnam.”)

On Memorial Day 2017, Trump visited Arlington National Cemetery, a short drive from the White House. He was accompanied on this visit by John Kelly, who was then the secretary of homeland security, and who would, a short time later, be named the White House chief of staff. The two men were set to visit Section 60, the 14-acre area of the cemetery that is the burial ground for those killed in America’s most recent wars. Kelly’s son Robert is buried in Section 60. A first lieutenant in the Marine Corps, Robert Kelly was killed in 2010 in Afghanistan. He was 29. Trump was meant, on this visit, to join John Kelly in paying respects at his son’s grave, and to comfort the families of other fallen service members. But according to sources with knowledge of this visit, Trump, while standing by Robert Kelly’s grave, turned directly to his father and said, “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?” Kelly (who declined to comment for this story) initially believed, people close to him said, that Trump was making a ham-handed reference to the selflessness of America’s all-volunteer force. But later he came to realize that Trump simply does not understand non-transactional life choices.

“He can’t fathom the idea of doing something for someone other than himself,” one of Kelly’s friends, a retired four-star general, told me. “He just thinks that anyone who does anything when there’s no direct personal gain to be had is a sucker. There’s no money in serving the nation.” Kelly’s friend went on to say, “Trump can’t imagine anyone else’s pain. That’s why he would say this to the father of a fallen marine on Memorial Day in the cemetery where he’s buried.”

I’ve asked numerous general officers over the past year for their analysis of Trump’s seeming contempt for military service. They offer a number of explanations. Some of his cynicism is rooted in frustration, they say. Trump, unlike previous presidents, tends to believe that the military, like other departments of the federal government, is beholden only to him, and not the Constitution. Many senior officers have expressed worry about Trump’s understanding of the rules governing the use of the armed forces. This issue came to a head in early June, during demonstrations in Washington, D.C., in response to police killings of Black people. James Mattis, the retired Marine general and former secretary of defense, lambasted Trump at the time for ordering law-enforcement officers to forcibly clear protesters from Lafayette Square, and for using soldiers as props: “When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution,” Mattis wrote. “Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.”

 

Another explanation is more quotidian, and aligns with a broader understanding of Trump’s material-focused worldview. The president believes that nothing is worth doing without the promise of monetary payback, and that talented people who don’t pursue riches are “losers.” (According to eyewitnesses, after a White House briefing given by the then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, Trump turned to aides and said, “That guy is smart. Why did he join the military?”)

Yet another, related, explanation concerns what appears to be Trump’s pathological fear of appearing to look like a “sucker” himself. His capacious definition of sucker includes those who lose their lives in service to their country, as well as those who are taken prisoner, or are wounded in battle. “He has a lot of fear,” one officer with firsthand knowledge of Trump’s views said. “He doesn’t see the heroism in fighting.” Several observers told me that Trump is deeply anxious about dying or being disfigured, and this worry manifests itself as disgust for those who have suffered. Trump recently claimed that he has received the bodies of slain service members “many, many” times, but in fact he has traveled to Dover Air Force Base, the transfer point for the remains of fallen service members, only four times since becoming president. In another incident, Trump falsely claimed that he had called “virtually all” of the families of service members who had died during his term, then began rush-shipping condolence letters when families said the president was not telling the truth.

Trump has been, for the duration of his presidency, fixated on staging military parades, but only of a certain sort. In a 2018 White House planning meeting for such an event, Trump asked his staff not to include wounded veterans, on grounds that spectators would feel uncomfortable in the presence of amputees. “Nobody wants to see that,” he said.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Jeffrey Goldberg is the editor in chief of The Atlantic and a recipient of the National Magazine Award for Reporting. He is the author of Prisoners: A Story of Friendship and Terror.

The 5 Best Natural Weed Killers and Preventatives You Can Find on Amazon

The 5 Best Natural Weed Killers and Preventatives You Can Find on Amazon

Stephanie Perry             

There are few things quite as frustrating as discovering a bunch of weeds invading your garden beds or pristine lawn. When non-chemical options such as pulling unwanted plants by hand or smothering them with mulch aren’t possible, you may decide to reach for a weed killer. But there are so many kinds to choose from; it can be a bit overwhelming. And some contain harsh synthetic chemicals that can be harmful to more than just your target weeds. Fortunately, many natural weed killers that contain less toxic ingredients such as vinegar, soap, or salt can help you keep unwanted plants under control with less worry about using them around your family and pets. These products may not work as quickly as synthetic herbicides, but they can still deliver the desired result when used consistently and correctly, according to their labels. Here are the best natural weed solutions, conveniently available on Amazon.

Best Overall: Green Gobbler Weed Killer

Courtesy of Amazon

Made with 20% ethanol-distilled vinegar, this effective weed killer will eliminate persistent chickweed, clover, and more. The multi-use formula is four times stronger than table vinegar alone. Use the included trigger spray to soak the leaves of unwanted weeds. Make sure to avoid surrounding desirable plants or grass, which also can be damaged by this product. Within 24 hours, you should see results. Be sure to keep the bottle in a dry and cool area for future use.

Buy It: Green Gobbler Vinegar Weed & Grass Killer, ($24, originally $29, Amazon)

Best Value: Natural Armor Weed Killer

Courtesy of Amazon

This eco-friendly option contains several natural ingredients like salt, citric acid, clove oil, vinegar, and glycerin, which become a deadly cocktail for over 250 types of weeds. Not only will this product kill these unwanted plants, but it can do so within 24 hours of initial use, so you can see the results you want quickly. The easy-to-use spray container doesn’t require any additional diluting or mixing and is ready to treat driveways, flower beds, wells, rock walls, and more straight from the container. For best results, spray this weed killer on warm, sunny days.

Buy It: Natural Armor Weed and Grass Killer, ($30, Amazon)

Best for Lawns: EspomaWeed Preventer

Courtesy of Amazon

Espoma Organic Weed Preventer is made from corn gluten meal, which won’t rid your yard of current weeds, but it can work as a precautionary tool. When used correctly, it dries out the roots of annual weeds as they start sprouting from seeds and prevents them from growing. This product should be used twice annually, once in the spring and again in the fall. It not only discourages weeds from growing, but also provides nitrogen to your lawn. This nutrient will make your grass appear greener and more lush right after you apply it. Plus, your kids and pets can safely play in your backyard immediately after application.

Buy It: Espoma Organic Weed Preventer, ($39, originally $44, Amazon)

Best Multipurpose: Calyptus Pure Vinegar

Courtesy of Amazon

Like the Green Gobbler Weed Killer, this formula from Calyptus uses concentrated vinegar to eliminate unwanted grass and other weeds. According to the label, it’s useful beyond the garden, too; it can be used to clean stainless steel, remove soap scum from bathroom tile, freshen up your patio, and more. Just be aware that it’s much stronger than table vinegar, so it is not safe to swallow and you should avoid breathing it in or getting it on your skin because it can cause burns.

Buy It: Calyptus 45% Pure Vinegar, ($23, originally $35, Amazon)

Best Fertilizer Combo: Safer Brand Weed Prevention 

Courtesy of Amazon

Like the Espoma brand product, this preventative option is 100% corn gluten meal. The convenient pellets will both deter weed sprouts and feed your shrubs, lawn, flower beds, or vegetable garden. Happy customers say it is “amazing,” “easy to apply,” and a “safe pre-emergent.”

Buy It: Safer Brand Weed Prevention Plus, ($22, Amazon)

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: The animals at risk from Alaska oil drilling

BBC News – U.S. and Canada

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: The animals at risk from Alaska oil drilling

August 20,  2020

A polar bear cub plays in a snow drift at the 1002 area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in 2014GETTY IMAGES. Image caption: Polar bears are particularly at risk of dying in oil spills.

 

The US government is pushing forward with controversial plans to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, by laying out the terms of a leasing program that would give oil companies access to the area.

The wildlife refuge in north-eastern Alaska sits above billions of barrels of oil. However, it is also home to many animals, including reindeer, polar bears and different species of bird.

The idea of drilling in the area did not originate with President Donald Trump and his administration. Rather, the leasing program is just the latest step in a controversy that has been ongoing since the late 1970’s.

One side argues that drilling for oil could bring in significant amounts of money, while providing jobs for people in Alaska.

Others, however, are fearful of the impact drilling would have on the many animals that live there – as well as the damage burning more fossil fuels would have on our rapidly warming planet.

This push from the Trump administration comes just two months after the Arctic circle recorded its highest ever temperatures.

MuskoxenGETTY IMAGES. Image caption: Muskoxen are one of many species of animals in the refuge.

 

“This plan could devastate the amazing array of wildlife that call the refuge home through noise pollution, habitat destruction, oil spills, and more climate chaos,” Kristen Monsell, from the US-based Center for Biological Diversity, told the BBC.

“The coastal plain is the most important land-based denning habitat for polar bears and is the birthing grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd.

1px transparent line

“Over 200 species of birds are found in the refuge along with Arctic foxes, black and brown bears, moose and many others.”

Any oil spills, for example, would not only harm nearby wildlife and their habitat, they could be fatal.

Arctic National Wildlife RefugeGETTY IMAGES.  Image caption: The controversy over drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has been ongoing since 1977.

 

Polar bears, Ms Monsell adds, are “particularly vulnerable” to oil spills.

“Polar bears must maintain a pristine hair coat as insulation against the cold – but when a polar bear comes into contact with spilled oil, it can soak a polar bear’s fur and persist for several weeks. It will be groomed and ingested, irritate the skin, and destroy the insulating abilities of the fur,” she says.

“Studies show that fatalities can occur from effects on the lungs, kidneys, blood, gastrointestinal tract, and other organs and systems. An oil-coated bear that is not cleaned and rehabilitated will probably die.”

Polar bearsGETTY IMAGES. Image caption: Oil can destroy a polar bear’s fur, which protects it from the harsh environment.

 

Oil industry bosses insist they have a well-established record of environmentally responsible development of Alaska’s energy resources. But environmentalists say the US government has not adequately considered the risks to wildlife and local communities.

Meanwhile, polar bears are far from the only animals who rely on this large stretch of wilderness.

The refuge is home to more than 200 types of bird. Prof Natalie Boelman, an environmental scientist from Columbia University, describes it as “a huge nursery for avian species”.

“If you go up there in the spring it’s crazy, every little puddle, even if it’s just half a metre by half a metre… you can barely see the water, it’s just covered in ducks and geese,” she tells the BBC.

She is particularly concerned about the impact sound levels from any drilling would have on animals in the refuge, as well as on the indigenous communities that live nearby.

“With industrial activity comes a great deal of sound, from aeroplane noise, helicopter noise, truck noises, seismic activity,” she says.

“There’s been very little scientific study into how this impacts the many different animals up there, but there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence that sounds that are associated with any anthropogenic activity really bother them.”

Northern shrike on a branch in Arctic refugeGETTY IMAGES. Image caption: The refuge is home to more than 200 species of bird including the northern shrike.

 

This anecdotal evidence, she adds, comes from the Native Alaskan communities that live near the refuge.

“Subsistence hunters who are really dependent on both caribou and waterfowl to sustain themselves and their families, they have a really hard time hunting when there’s air traffic going by,” Prof Boelman says.

“They report having to just give up hunting a specific animal as soon as a helicopter or aeroplane goes by, because it just wakes the animal up – and that’s a huge loss for them.

“So we know it has an impact on the behavior of the animals, and also that this then has an effect on the subsistence of communities. But also, what does that noise do to animals’ stress levels? What does that do to their reproductive success?”

CaribouGETTY IMAGES. Image caption: The refuge’s caribou herd is particularly vulnerable.

 

Conservationists also fear for the Porcupine caribou, a breed of North American reindeer which roams the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The coast – where proposed drilling would take place, should it go ahead – is particularly important to them.

Maggie Howell, executive director of the Wolf Conservation Center, tells the BBC: “That coastal plain is the calving route for caribou, and the caribou also has one of the most impressive migrations of any land mammal.

 

“The herd travels north to the coastal plain every year, about 400 miles (644 km) each way, and that’s where they’re having their babies. Any drilling is going to impact their lives drastically, as well as all the other animals and people who depend on that caribou.”

One animal that predates on caribou, and would therefore also be at risk, is the Alaskan tundra wolf. Ms Howell says her team has “already seen” the damage done by drilling in other areas with caribou and wolf populations, such as Alberta in Canada.

“As a refuge, it’s there to be preserved,” Ms Howell says. “It’s not only a safe haven for the wildlife, but also a symbol of our country’s national heritage.

“And if these animals can’t be safe in a wildlife refuge, where can they be? Where can they be just left alone to live their lives and fulfill their own purpose?”