Senate changes to environmental assessment bill are worse than Harper-era legislation: experts

Tailings for Imperial Metals’ Red Chris Mine perch above a B.C. lake. Proposed new rules for reviewing major projects like mines and pipelines have been majorly revised by the Senate. Photo: Garth Lenz / The Narwhal

Following intensive lobbying by the oil and gas industry, the unelected Canadian Senate has approved more than 180 controversial amendments to Bill C-69. Experts describe the amendments as incoherent, badly drafted and an attempt to dodge climate change considerations

Jason Kenney travelled to Ottawa only days after he was sworn in, telling members of the Senate’s energy committee that Bill C-69 was the “culmination of a full-frontal attack” on Alberta’s economic prosperity.

But the Senate’s surgery is so extreme, with many of its wide-ranging amendments mirroring requests from the oil and gas industry, some verbatim, that environmental law experts say Canada would be better off leaving the Harper-era environmental assessment legislation in place.

Following a report from an expert panel that travelled across the country, hearing from stakeholders in 21 cities, federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna introduced Bill C-69 in February 2018, saying the new legislation would ensure “more timely and predictable project reviews” that would attract investment and development.

The 340-page bill replaces the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. The bill also makes changes to the Navigable Waters Act and overhauls the beleaguered National Energy Board, replacing it with a Canadian Energy Regulator.

The new impact assessment agency would review all major projects in the country, assessing not just the environmental impacts but also the social, economic and health impacts, as well as the effects on Indigenous peoples.

The bill establishes timelines for assessments and requires that impacts on Indigenous rights and culture be considered early on in the planning process. MORE

RELATED:

Senate Playing With Fire on Environmental Bills

Spinach, strawberries and kale top annual report on the most pesticide-tainted produce

Annual analysis finds almost 70 percent of U.S. fruits and vegetables have pesticide residues
Credit: Farsai Chaikulngamdee/Unsplash

If you’re going to buy organic, strawberries, spinach, kale, nectarines and apples might be a good place to start.

Those are the top five U.S. fruits and vegetables most tainted with pesticides, according to the annual Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce report from the nonprofit Environmental Working Group.

The report, released today, found nearly 70 percent of U.S. produce is contaminated with pesticides, and more than 225 pesticides or pesticide breakdowns compounds are found on our nation’s produce.

There are a broad range of pesticides, and it’s still not entirely clear how much residue may harm people.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which produces the pesticide data analyzed by EWG, just last December boasted that the U.S. food supply is “among the safest in the world” for pesticide residues.

“More than 99 percent of the samples tested had pesticide residues well below benchmark levels established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),” the agency said in a statement on the most recent round of pesticide testing.

However, the new EWG analysis is concerning because many pesticides found on our food have been linked to cancer, respiratory problems, depression, endocrine disruption and impacts to people’s reproductive systems. Studies increasingly show that these health impacts are linked to exposure at levels below the thresholds set by federal agencies such as the EPA  MORE

Plastic threatens our health from before production to long after it’s thrown away: Report

“Every stage of the plastic lifecycle poses significant risks to human health, and the majority of people worldwide are exposed to plastic at multiple stages of this lifecycle.”

Credit: Bo Eide/flickr

Plastic pollution is a “threat to human life and human rights” and, in order to stem this problem, we have to overhaul how we produce, use and dispose of it, according to an international report released today.

The report, the result of a collaboration between seven environmental organizations, finds most attempts to examine the impact of plastic on people and the planet focus on one aspect—such as manufacturing, the testing of products, or how plastic is disposed. However, the authors of today’s report say we need to look at the entire lifecycle of plastic because “each of those stages interacts with others, and all of them interact with the human environment and the human body in multiple, often intersecting, ways.”

Plastic pollution has been recognized as pervasive across the planet and research increasingly finds it is infiltrating wildlife, our food and us—bringing fresh concerns about how our plastic addiction may be impacting our health.

“Health problems associated with plastics throughout the lifecycle includes numerous forms of cancers, diabetes, several organ malfunctions, impact on eyes, skin and other sensory organs, birth defects” and many other impacts, said David Azoulay, a report author and managing attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, in an email to EHN. “And those are only the human health costs, they do not mention impacts on climate, impacts on fisheries or farmland productivity,” he added. MORE