Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’T Belong Near Our National Treasures Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’T Belong Near Our National Treasures

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’T Belong Near Our National Treasures Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’T Belong Near Our National Treasures Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’t Belong Near Our National Treasures Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Doesn’t Belong Near Our National Treasures Environment Virginia Rob Kerth, Jordan Schneider, and Elizabeth Ridlington, Frontier Group Anna Aurilio, Environment America Research & Policy Center Summer 2011 Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Lauren Pagel, Legislative Coordinator with Earthworks, and Dusty Horwitt, Senior Counsel with Environmental Working Group, for their insight- ful comments on drafts of this report. Thanks also to Tony Dutzik and Travis Madsen of Frontier Group for editorial assistance. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of Environment Virginia. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. © 2011 Environment Virginia We all want clean air, clean water and open spaces. But it takes independent research and tough-minded advocacy to win concrete results for our environment, especially when powerful interests stand in the way of environmental progress. That’s the idea behind Environment Virginia. We focus exclusively on protecting Virginia’s air, water and open spaces. We speak out and take action at the local, state and national levels to improve the quality of our environment and our lives. For more information or to download additional copies of this report, please visit www.environmentvirginia.org. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a cleaner, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate information and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal levels. For more information about Frontier Group, please visit www.frontiergroup.org. Cover photo: Robin Silver Photography Design and Layout: Harriet Eckstein Graphic Design Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 The Grand Canyon Is a Uniquely Valuable Natural Place 5 Mining Has Competed with Tourism for Use of the Grand Canyon 7 Uranium Mining Is a Dirty, High-Risk Activity 10 Uranium Mining Involves Dangerous Substances 10 Mining Damages the Environment 11 Each Uranium Mining and Processing Technique Poses Risks 13 Uranium Mining Has a Track Record of Environmental Contamination 14 Arizona: Fouled Streams, Damaged Aquifers, and Toxic Dirt Piles 15 New Mexico: A Giant Spill and an Ongoing Cleanup 17 The Atlas Mill at Moab: 16 Million Tons of Radioactive Rubble 18 Colorado: Poisoned Well Water and Sick Residents 19 Policy Recommendations 21 Notes 23 Executive Summary ranium mining—which often re- • Contaminated water can leak from quires vast open pits, spreads radio- mines or tailings piles, potentially en- Uactive dust through the air, and leaks tering groundwater or nearby streams radioactivity and toxic chemicals into the and transporting contamination away environment—is among the riskiest indus- from the mine. Contaminated water trial activities in the world. Every uranium that enters municipal water sup- mine ever operated in the United States plies can threaten the health of large has required some degree of toxic waste numbers of people. Mining near the cleanup, and the worst have sickened doz- Colorado River, which flows through ens of people, contaminated miles of rivers the Grand Canyon, threatens the and streams, and required the cleanup of drinking water supplies of millions hundreds of acres of land. of people in cities like Phoenix, Los After several decades of reduced activity Angeles, and Las Vegas. due to depressed prices, uranium mining is making a comeback—including on the • Airborne uranium dust threatens the edges of one of our nation’s most treasured health of miners and nearby residents; wild places, the Grand Canyon. if inhaled, it can cause lung cancer. Uranium mining has left a toxic trail across the West—including at the Grand • Tailings – the waste rock and dirt left Canyon itself. To protect this national trea- over once uranium extraction and sure, and the millions of people who visit milling are complete—are 85 per- it each year, mining should be prohibited cent as radioactive on average as the on land near Grand Canyon National Park, original ore and contain other toxic and other treasured places. chemicals such as arsenic. Tailings Uranium mining is risky for miners, piles can make mine sites permanently local residents and the environment. hazardous and leach toxic substances Mines can release uranium itself—a dan- into the environment. gerous radioactive substance—or toxic chemicals used in the mining process. Executive Summary Uranium mining and processing has Park contributes $686 million to left a toxic trail across the West—in- Northern Arizona’s economy every cluding at the Grand Canyon itself. year, supporting nearly 12,000 jobs. • Four streams in Arizona’s Grand • The Colorado River, which provides Canyon National Park suffer from drinking water for 25 million people some degree of uranium contamina- downstream, runs through the Grand tion after mining activity occurred in Canyon and draws water from the the area. area’s springs and streams. • In New Mexico, a 1979 dam break Uranium mining is incompatible released radioactive wastewater from with the preservation of the Grand a New Mexico uranium mill into the Canyon as a treasured ecosystem and Little Colorado River, releasing more natural wonder. The Obama adminis- radiation than was released in the tration should act to protect the Grand Three Mile Island nuclear power plant Canyon from the threat of uranium accident into downstream waterways. mining. • In Utah, workers are still cleaning up • Extend the moratorium on new 16 million tons of contaminated tail- mining claims near the Grand ings at the site of one of the nation’s Canyon. In June of 2011, Interior first mines in Moab. Secretary Ken Salazar extended a moratorium on new mining claims • In Colorado, residents of Lincoln near the canyon—in place since Park, a small community near a ura- 2009—through December 2011. The nium mill, have had to stop drinking Obama administration should finalize well water because of contamination its preferred alternative and ban new from the mill’s old tailings pools, and claims within a one million acre area suffered health consequences from near the canyon for the next 20 years, uranium and other toxic substances in while pursuing permanent protection. their water. • Reform mining laws to allow regu- Grand Canyon National Park is a lators to deny permission to mine uniquely valuable place and ecosystem. where significant natural places or human health are at risk. The 1872 • The Grand Canyon is a unique natural General Mining Law, which cur- wonder—one of the world’s deepest rently governs mining on federal land and widest canyons, home to spectac- through a very limited permitting ular views, great biological diversity, process, is too lax in granting mining and a unique geologic record. companies the right to stake and de- velop claims. Most federal land is con- • 4.2 million people visit Grand Canyon sidered open for mining by default, National Park every year, making it and regulators lack sufficient power to the second most visited park in the weigh the costs and benefits of mining National Park System, and the most against other possible uses of the land. visited park west of the Mississippi. Mining should be placed on an even footing with recreation and other land • Tourism to Grand Canyon National uses by allowing regulators to make a 2 Grand Canyon at Risk balanced evaluation of the best use of should cover all foreseeable reclama- federal lands. tion activities, as well as insurance against accidents that would signifi- • Require uranium mining companies cantly raise cleanup costs. Addition- to clean up contamination. Uranium ally, companies should not be allowed companies should be required to post to place mines on “standby” without enough money to cover the full cost cleaning them up sufficiently to pre- of reclamation at mine and mill sites vent the spread of contamination. before beginning operations. Costs Executive Summary Introduction he hike from the Grand Canyon Mine—the creek is too contaminated with National Park headquarters to the uranium. THermit’s Rest Overlook is one of the Most Americans do not think of Grand most beautiful in America. Incredible views Canyon National Park as a mining site. greet hikers the entire way as the trail hugs Yet, for years, uranium was mined within the canyon’s rim, looking out over the mas- the park’s borders—leaving scars that will sive gorge down to the Colorado River. remain for years to come. At one point, however, the trail cuts The Grand Canyon is not the only place away from the canyon. There, behind a in the West scarred by uranium mining. rusty fence, sits the remnants of what was Indeed, uranium mines and processing once one of the nation’s biggest sources of facilities have left a toxic trail across the uranium, the Orphan Mine. After sitting West—harming both the natural environ- abandoned for decades, the mine’s build- ment and human health. ings were recently removed, but the ground With rising uranium prices driving around the site remains too contaminated mining companies to pursue the resump- for visitors to enter. tion of mining activity in the West, it is Hiking down from Hermit’s Rest into a good time to review the toxic legacy of the canyon, hikers can turn onto the Tonto uranium mining. That legacy demonstrates Trail, a popular hiking trail that runs right that uranium mining is utterly incompat- through the middle of the canyon. Tower- ible with the preservation of the Grand ing limestone walls line the right side of Canyon as a healthy ecosystem and natural the trail, while the Colorado River passes wonder. by 1,000 feet below and to the left.
Recommended publications
  • Support Document for Revised
    Support Document for the Revised National Priorities List Final Rule - July 2000 State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460 ABSTRACT Pursuant to Section 105(a)(8)(B) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) periodically adds hazardous waste sites to the National Priorities List (NPL). Prior to actually listing a site, EPA proposes the site in the Federal Register and solicits public comments. This document provides responses to public comments received on one site proposed on January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2950), one site proposed on April 23, 1999 (64 FR 19968), one site proposed on July 22, 1999 (64 FR 39886), and two sites proposed on February 4, 2000 (65 FR 5468). All of the sites are added to the NPL based on an evaluation under the HRS. These sites are being added to the NPL in a final rule published in the Federal Register in July 2000. ii CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................ v Introduction ................................................................... vii Background of the NPL ....................................................... vii Development of the NPL ......................................................viii Hazard Ranking System........................................................ix Other
    [Show full text]
  • Serum Anion Gap: Its Uses and Limitations in Clinical Medicine
    In-Depth Review Serum Anion Gap: Its Uses and Limitations in Clinical Medicine Jeffrey A. Kraut* and Nicolaos E. Madias† *Medical and Research Services VHAGLA Healthcare System, UCLA Membrane Biology Laboratory, and Division of Nephrology VHAGLA Healthcare System and David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California; and †Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Caritas St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center, and Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts The serum anion gap, calculated from the electrolytes measured in the chemical laboratory, is defined as the sum of serum chloride and bicarbonate concentrations subtracted from the serum sodium concentration. This entity is used in the detection and analysis of acid-base disorders, assessment of quality control in the chemical laboratory, and detection of such disorders as multiple myeloma, bromide intoxication, and lithium intoxication. The normal value can vary widely, reflecting both differences in the methods that are used to measure its constituents and substantial interindividual variability. Low values most commonly indicate laboratory error or hypoalbuminemia but can denote the presence of a paraproteinemia or intoxi- cation with lithium, bromide, or iodide. Elevated values most commonly indicate metabolic acidosis but can reflect laboratory error, metabolic alkalosis, hyperphosphatemia, or paraproteinemia. Metabolic acidosis can be divided into high anion and normal anion gap varieties, which can be present alone or concurrently. A presumed 1:1 stoichiometry between change in the ؊ ⌬ ⌬ serum anion gap ( AG) and change in the serum bicarbonate concentration ( HCO3 ) has been used to uncover the concurrence of mixed metabolic acid-base disorders in patients with high anion gap acidosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Detailed Topic Index of Sure Success MAGIC 11Th Edn. Please Download, Save As PDF on Your Phones/Laptops/Computers OR Still
    Sure Success MAGIC 11th Edition: 'TOPIC INDEX' by Dr B Ramgopal Detailed Topic Index of Sure Success MAGIC 11th edn. Please download, save as PDF on your phones/laptops/computers OR still better print it and insert 2-3 extra blank sheets in between the chapters so that you can just spiral bind it later and use it to insert any extra topics/ matter which you feel is relevant. Thus it would add more value and help in revision also. All the Best Dr Ramgopal Sure Success MAGIC 11th Edition: 'TOPIC INDEX' by Dr B Ramgopal EMBRYOLOGY GROWTH FACTORS AND GENES IN EMBRYOGENESIS 1 SPERMATOGENESIS 1 Spermatozoa (Sperm) 1 OOGENESIS 2 PRE-EMBRYONIC PERIOD 3 Fertilization and Implantation (0–7 Days; 1st Week) 3 2nd Week of Development 4 EMBRYONIC PERIOD (3–8 WEEKS) 4 Stage of Trilaminar Germ Disc—3rd Week 4 Ectoderm 4 Neurulation 4 Mesoderm 4 TIMELINE OF EVENTS AFTER FERTILIZATION 5 GERM LAYER DERIVATIVES 6 BRANCHIAL (PHARYNGEAL) APPARATUS 8 Branchial Arch Derivatives 8 Branchial Cleft Derivatives 8 Branchial Pouch Derivatives 8 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT 9 Derivatives of the ‘Gut’ 9 Liver development 9` Pancreas development 9 CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM 9 Heart tube embryological derivatives 9 Aortic Arches and their Derivatives (Fig. 1.5) 9 More Important Points about CVS Embryology 10 Fetal-Postnatal Derivatives 10 URINARY SYSTEM 11 Kidney Embryology 11 Urinary bladder embryology 11 Development of urethra 11 GENITAL HOMOLOGUES IN MALE AND FEMALE 11 DESCENT OF TESTIS , Cryptorchidism 12 CNS EMBRYOLOGY 12 Parts of Developing Brain and their Adult Derivatives
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Health Criteria 166 METHYL BROMIDE
    Environmental Health Criteria 166 METHYL BROMIDE Please note that the layout and pagination of this web version are not identical with the printed version. Methyl Bromide (EHC 166, 1995) INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CRITERIA 166 METHYL BROMIDE This report contains the collective views of an international group of experts and does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, or the World Health Organization. First draft prepared by Dr. R.F. Hertel and Dr. T. Kielhorn. Fraunhofer Institute of Toxicology and Aerosol Research, Hanover, Germany Published under the joint sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization World Health Orgnization Geneva, 1995 The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) is a joint venture of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization. The main objective of the IPCS is to carry out and disseminate evaluations of the effects of chemicals on human health and the quality of the environment. Supporting activities include the development of epidemiological, experimental laboratory, and risk-assessment methods that could produce internationally comparable results, and the development of manpower in the field of toxicology. Other activities carried out by the IPCS include the development of know-how for coping with chemical accidents,
    [Show full text]
  • Health Hazard Evaluation Report 77-73-610
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH CINCINNATI, OHIO 45226 HEALTH HAZARD EVALUATION DETERMINATION REPORT HE 77-73-610 VELSICOL CHEMICAL CORPORATION 500 NORTH BANKSON STREET ST. LOUIS, MICHIGAN 48880 August 1979 I. TOXICITY DETERMINATION The fo 11 owing determi nations have been made based on envi ronmenta1 air samples collected on June 6-8, 1977, medical examination of employees on October 17-22, 1977, evaluation of ventilation systems and work practices, and available toxicity information. The accompanying medical report (following this Toxicity Determination Report} produced for NIOSH under contract by Cook County Hospital gives good evidence that workers at the St. Louis, Michigan Velsicol Plant showed a high incidence of acneifor,n skin lesions quite possibly caused by occupational exposure to halogenated chemicals. Additional evidence is presented that some employees may have had adverse health effects upon either their nervous, cardiovascular, hepatic, immune or respiratory systems. Medical recommendations are included in the following medical report and in Section VI of this report. Employee exposures to ethylene dichloride (EDC) in the Fine Chemicals and HBCD Department exceeded the NIOSH recommend standard. In the Industrial Bromides Department, employee exposures to carbon tetrachloride exceeded the NIOSH recommended standard. In the Tetrabromophthalic Anhydride Department; employees may be overexposed to sulfur dioxide during the opening of the reactor hatch for raw material addition. Employees were also exposed to a variety of other chemicals for which neither evaluation criteria nor air sampling/analytical methods existed, or whose air samples were below the analytical limits of detection.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Report (PDF)
    Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Threatens a National Treasure 2018 Update Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Threatens a National Treasure Abigail Bradford, Frontier Group Christy Leavitt and Steve Blackledge, Environment America Research & Policy Center 2018 Update Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Kelly Burke of Wildlands Network; Miriam Wasser, freelance environmental journalist; and Roger Clark of the Grand Canyon Trust for their insightful comments on drafts of this report. Thanks also to Tony Dutzik, Elizabeth Berg and Gideon Weissman of Frontier Group, and Bret Fanshaw of Environment America Research & Policy Center for providing editorial support. This is an updated version of a report originally published in 2011. We thank Rob Kerth, Jordan Schneider and Elizabeth Ridlington of Frontier Group and Anna Aurilio of Environment America Research & Policy Center for their efforts as authors of the original report, as well as all those who contributed to the original report as reviewers or funders. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of Environment America Research & Policy Center. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. © 2018 Environment America Research & Policy Center. Some Rights Reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 Unported License. To view the terms of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0. Environment America Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization. We are dedicated to protecting our air, water and open spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Compend for Commanding Officers of Naval Vessels to Which
    C F N AVAL VESSELS 1941 MEDICAL COMPEND For Commanding Officers of Naval Vessels to Which no Member of the Medical Department of the United States Navy Is Attached To accompany -Srfedici««<^Sox PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1941 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. - -- -- - - - Price 60 cents Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Navy Department, Washington , D. C., July i, 1911. This Medical Compend for commanding officers of naval vessels to which no member of the Medical Department of the United States Navy is attached, is published for their aid in the knowledge and use of the contents of the Medicine Box, United States Navy, as well as to be a general guide in the preservation of the health of the per- sonnel under their command. Ross T. McIntire, General United States . Surgeon , Navy CONTENTS Page Chapter I. Introduction 1 Contents of medicine boxes 3 The medicine box 3 The supplemental medicine box 4 The medical boat box 5 Directions for the use of medical supplies 6 Chapter II. First aid 10 Chapter III. Special diseases 32 Chapter IV. Venereal diseases and prophylaxis 61 Chapter V. Hospitalization 67 Chapter VI. Deaths 70 Chapter VII. Personal hygiene 76 Chapter VIII. Preventive medicine 78 Chapter IX. Quarantine, disinfection, bills of health 83 Glossary 111 Index - - 115 Chapter I MEDICAL SUPPLIES Introduction This Medical Compend, which accompanies the medicine box, is published primarily for the use of commanding officers of naval vessels to which no representative of the medical department is attached.
    [Show full text]
  • Intentional Versus Unintentional Child Toxicity at National Center of Environmental and Clinical Research of Toxicology (Nectr)
    INTENTIONAL VERSUS UNINTENTIONAL CHILD TOXICITY AT NATIONAL CENTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLINICAL RESEARCH OF TOXICOLOGY (NECTR) Thesis Submitted for partial fulfillment of Master Degree (M.Sc.) in FORENSIC MEDICINE & CLINICAL TOXICOLOGY By RANIA MOHSEN ABDEL RAHEEM (M.B., B.CH.) Demonstrator of Forensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University Under Supervision of PROF. DR. DINA ALI SHOKRY Professor and Head of Forensic Medicine & Clinical Toxicology Department Faculty of Medicine – Cairo University PROF. DR. HODA ABD ELMAGIED EL GHAMRY Professor of Forensic Medicine & Clinical Toxicology Faculty of Medicine – Cairo University DR. MARWA ISSAK MOHAMED Lecturer of Forensic Medicine & Clinical Toxicology Faculty of Medicine – Cairo University Faculty of Medicine Cairo University 2018 ﺑﺴﻢ اﷲ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ II ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost, all praises to ALLAH, who gave me the strength to accomplish this achievement and gifted me with people who tried to help all-through. It is a great honor to me to express my deepest gratitude to Prof. Dr. Dina Ali Shokry, Professor and Head of Forensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, for her unlimited support, valuable guidance and sincere supervision that were the most driving forces in the initiation and progress of this work. She performed much effort and consumed much of her time in guiding me through this thesis. No words can fulfill my infinite thanks and appreciation to Prof. Dr. Hoda Abd Elmagied El Ghamry, Professor of Forensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, for her continuous encouragement, meticulous supervision and great-unlimited help through this work.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 ACMT Annual Scientific Meeting, March 27–29, 2015 Clearwater Beach, FL
    J. Med. Toxicol. DOI 10.1007/s13181-014-0458-4 ANNUAL MEETING ABSTRACTS 2015 ACMT Annual Scientific Meeting, March 27–29, 2015 Clearwater Beach, FL 1. Efficacy of Trypsin in Treating Coral Snake Envenomation in the 2. Lipid Emulsion Rapidly Activates Insulin Signaling Both Alone Porcine Model and to Combat Toxicity During Bupivacaine-Induced Sensitization of IRS1 Parker-Cote JL, O’Rourke D, Brewer KL, Lertpiriyapong K, Girard J, Bush SP, Miller SN, Punja M, Meggs WJ Fettiplace MR, Kowal K, Young A, Ripper R, Lis K, Weinberg G Brody School of Medicine at Eastern Carolina University, Greenville, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA NC, USA Background: Recent publications have identified that local anesthetics Background: Though current definitive treatment for Micrurus fulvius uncouple insulinergic signaling by inhibitiing pi3k/Akt and lipid emul- fulvius envenomation is antivenin, this horse serum treatment carries sion activates Akt/GSK-3β following ischemia–reperfusion. Further- risks, and the antivenin for M. fulvius (Eastern coral snake) envenomation more, while it is clear that lipid emulsion exerts a cardiotonic effect, it is no longer in production. Therefore, investigation in alternative treat- is unclear through what pathway this effect functions. ments for M. fulvius envenomation is warranted. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that bupivacaine uncouples insulinergic Research Question: The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy signaling which sensitizes the heart to insulinergic signaling during of trypsin, a protease, in an in vivo porcine model by the local injection of recovery (via feedback to IRS1) and lipid emulsion activates insulinergic trypsin after M. fulvius venom injection.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Synthetic Fuels: Renewable Routes for the Conversion of Non-Fossil Feedstocks Into Gaseous Fuels and Their End Uses
    energies Review Green Synthetic Fuels: Renewable Routes for the Conversion of Non-Fossil Feedstocks into Gaseous Fuels and Their End Uses Elena Rozzi 1,2,*, Francesco Demetrio Minuto 1,2 , Andrea Lanzini 1,2 and Pierluigi Leone 1,2 1 Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy; [email protected] (F.D.M.); [email protected] (A.L.); [email protected] (P.L.) 2 Energy Center Lab, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 6 December 2019; Accepted: 10 January 2020; Published: 15 January 2020 Abstract: Innovative renewable routes are potentially able to sustain the transition to a decarbonized energy economy. Green synthetic fuels, including hydrogen and natural gas, are considered viable alternatives to fossil fuels. Indeed, they play a fundamental role in those sectors that are difficult to electrify (e.g., road mobility or high-heat industrial processes), are capable of mitigating problems related to flexibility and instantaneous balance of the electric grid, are suitable for large-size and long-term storage and can be transported through the gas network. This article is an overview of the overall supply chain, including production, transport, storage and end uses. Available fuel conversion technologies use renewable energy for the catalytic conversion of non-fossil feedstocks into hydrogen and syngas. We will show how relevant technologies involve thermochemical, electrochemical and photochemical processes. The syngas quality can be improved by catalytic CO and CO2 methanation reactions for the generation of synthetic natural gas. Finally, the produced gaseous fuels could follow several pathways for transport and lead to different final uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Methvl Bromide
    INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY Environmental Health Criteria 166 Methvl Bromide I R :ndei the joint sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, teoationaI Labour Organisation, and the World Health Organization THE ENVlRONMrtsr(At HEAL')-) ('RITEFIIA 3611108 Acetorritrile (No 154 19931 Dixie irotolo,nrys (No 74 1987 Acro)ejn (No. 127, 1991) 1,2 Dch oroetrano (No 62 987( Acrylamide (No. 49 1985) 24 D chlorophenoxyacer c acid (24-0) fNo 29. Acrylonitrile (No 28 1983) 1984) Aged population, principles for eva(uat1ng the 2.4-Dichlorophenoxyacet c acid envroninc'nilal effects of chemicals (No. 144, 1992) aspects (No 84 1989) Aldicarb (No 121 1991( 1.30 chloropropene, 1 2 dichloro1 ropane at cI Aidriri and dieldrin (No 91 '989) mixtures (No 146. 1993) A(tethrins (No 87, 1989) Dicbtoraos (No 79 1988) Amitrole (No 158, 1994) Diethylhexyl phthalato (Nc 131 1902) Ammonia (No 54 1986) Dimethoste (No. 90, 1989) Arsenic (No 18 19i31( Dimethy)forrrarn dx (No 114 1901) Asbestos and ether natural m neral I bins O methyl sulfate (No 48 1985) (No 53, 1986) Diseases of suspectc-d chemical i'tio Igy iii) Bar urn (No 107 1990) her preventon pr nciplev Of s',,,1 I ', 011 Benomyt (No 148. 1993i (No 72, 1987) Benzene (No 150 1993) Di1hiocarbamatc pest rides, rthylenethiore.i and Beryllium (No 106. 1990) popyleneth,ourea a genlerar irntroductioii Bloinarkers and 'isk ansecsrnrnt c oor r pts (t'o 78. 1968) and principles (No 155. 1903) S c1romagnet r i e)ds IN , 137 00, Biotoxios aquatic (mar ire a rd freshwater) E'rdos bin No 409511 (No 37 1984) E - dim iNc 130 1 8mm rated diphenylethern (No 162 1 9"4i 5' 'vcnncntal ep.ci'i Butano3 four isomers No 05 l87 ,ioJks n (Nc 7 i I 11.1' Cadm irn (No 134 1992) EplcI on_li', drin (No 33 1984) Cadm urn - ens ronmerital aspects No 135, 1992) Etnye.e oxdr (No 55 r9h5( Camprechler (No 45, 1984) Extremel , l ow freqiierrr y EL - i Is N, Carbarnale pestic,den a general rtrodiii trcil 1 7au) (No 64 1986) Clot ii it' ill (No ' 33 '902, Carbaryl (Nc.
    [Show full text]
  • A 50-State Roadmap for Curbing Our Dependence on Petroleum
    Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Threatens a National Treasure 2018 Update Grand Canyon at Risk Uranium Mining Threatens a National Treasure Abigail Bradford, Frontier Group Christy Leavitt and Steve Blackledge, Environment America Research & Policy Center 2018 Update Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Kelly Burke of Wildlands Network; Miriam Wasser, freelance environmental journalist; and Roger Clark of the Grand Canyon Trust for their insightful comments on drafts of this report. Thanks also toT ony Dutzik, Elizabeth Berg and Gideon Weissman of Frontier Group, and Bret Fanshaw of Environment America Research & Policy Center for providing editorial support. This is an updated version of a report originally published in 2011. We thank Rob Kerth, Jordan Schneider and Elizabeth Ridlington of Frontier Group and Anna Aurilio of Environment America Research & Policy Center for their efforts as authors of the original report, as well as all those who contributed to the original report as reviewers or funders. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The recommendations are those of Environment Montana Research & Policy Center. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. © 2018 Environment Montana Research & Policy Center. Some Rights Reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 Unported License. To view the terms of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by- nc-nd/3.0. The Environment Montana Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization. We are dedicated to protecting Montana’s air, water and open spaces.
    [Show full text]