Radioactive Used Cars From Japan – One More Problem The World Needs To Contend With

By Theodora Filis

Following the tsunami and earthquake that struck Japan in March, automobile manufactures announced they would begin testing all new vehicles for the presence of radioactive material before leaving the plant.

The national radiation limit in Japan for cars being exported for sale to other countries is 0.3 microsieverts an hour.


Japanese car dealers who export used vehicles, to Russia and Southeast Asia, are now having their shipments refused because of high radiation levels. Customs authorities in Russia have turned away hundreds of vehicles from used car dealers in Japan, and is now joined by Chile and Australia – both received shipments of automobiles contaminated with low levels of radiation.


As testing for radiation gets tougher, car dealers in Japan are left with two choices, destroy the vehicle as the government has required, or obtain new documentation and unload the automobile to an unsuspecting Japanese buyer. Japanese automakers are taking steps to reassure US consumers that they are not concerned about radiation risk on vehicles exported to the there.

Australia to screen Japanese cars for radiation

Honda, Nissan and Toyota told Inside Line that they do not believe there is any harmful radiation risk on cars and parts coming from Japan.

Mike Michels, vice president of communications for Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., said "The majority of our operations are in Aichi prefecture, which is far from the earthquake zone and contamination sources. Vehicles are plastic-wrapped on ships ("wrapguard") and washed at our processing facilities before shipping to dealers. This is normal procedure. Also, Customs and Homeland Security already routinely monitor shipments for radiation as part of anti-terrorism procedures. Whatever else may be needed is unclear, but we are committed to ensuring that vehicles delivered to customers are safe in every way."

Nissan Americas vice president of corporate communications, David Reuter, said "We are monitoring the situation closely and will take all necessary actions to ensure safety. Nissan's plants and ports are not in the zone where any potential radioactive fallout could cause a problem."

Nissan's Iwaki powertrain plant, however, is located about 30 miles from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant that has been at the center of the crisis in Japan.

Honda also took steps to reassure US consumers about any radiation risk in exported vehicles. "Regarding radiation, our assembly plants aren't located anywhere near the damaged reactors," said Edward K. Miller, Honda North America senior manager for news media and industry relations. Miller added, that in 2010, 87 percent of the vehicles Honda sold in the US were built domestically. It imports 13 percent of finished vehicles.

Nissan has an assembly plant in Tochigi and Honda operates an engine components plant in Tochigi, less than 100 miles from the damaged nuclear reactors in Fukushima.

Mazda North America did not comment on the issue.

Fears of radioactive fallout prompted several air carriers to cancel flights to Narita International Airport, which services Tokyo. Lufthansa, KLM and Air China canceled flights after a small spike in radiation levels were detected in Tokyo following the reactor fire at the Fukushima nuclear plant.

The US government had not addressed any possible contamination issue in exported goods from Japan at this point.

However, in a 2010 guidebook on response to nuclear contamination published jointly by such agencies as the US Department of Homeland Security, US Department of Defense, the EPA and the US Department of Transportation urges "fire hosing" of contaminated objects with "smooth impermeable surfaces" to counteract contamination.

Protesting The Keystone XL Pipeline – One Man's Account Shows Us How Being Arrested Is Not Only Frightening – It Can Also Be An Awakening

By Theodora Filis and Brian Hicks


In June 2010 TransCanada commenced commercial operation of the first phase of the $13 billion Keystone Pipeline System. Keystone's first phase was the conversion of natural gas pipeline to crude oil pipeline and construction of an innovative bullet line that brings the crude oil from Canada to the US Midwest.

 Brian Hicks, Keystone XL Protester 

The proposed Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project is an approximate 2,673-kilometre (1,661-mile), 36-inch crude oil pipeline that would begin at Hardisty, Alberta, Canada and extend southeast through Saskatchewan, Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska. It would incorporate a portion of the Keystone Pipeline through Nebraska and Kansas to serve markets at Cushing, Oklahoma before continuing through Oklahoma to a delivery point near existing terminals in Nederland, Texas to serve the Port Arthur, Texas marketplace.

“The officer held my upper arm and led me toward the processing tent and vehicles, saying “Watch your step”, as we came to the edge of the sidewalk. I said thank you. We stood like that for a few minutes, his hand on my arm, until he handed me off to another officer, a regular park police officer. Someone was holding me at all times throughout the process, until I was in the police van. I suppose that’s standard procedure when a suspect is in custody – you wouldn’t want them running away – but mostly it felt to me that they were there for my safety, because you are quite vulnerable when your hands are lashed behind your back.” Brian Hicks, Keystone XL Protester

Refining tar sands oil is dirtier than refining conventional oil, and results in higher emissions of toxic sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide. These emissions cause smog and acid rain and contribute to respiratory diseases like asthma.

Communities near the refineries where the Keystone XL pipeline would terminate, many of them low-income and communities, already live with dangerously high levels of air pollution. 

Investing in tar sands oil now will delay investments in clean and safe alternatives to oil, such as better fuel economy requirements, plug-in electric cars fueled by solar power, and smart growth and public transportation infrastructure that give Americans choices other than cars.

TransCanada, and its allies, know the US hopes to be less dependent of foreign oil and plays on those hopes by presenting the pipeline as a solution. Please don't be fooled. The Keystone XL pipeline would only serve to perpetuate dependence on oil and will not make the US more secure.

“Over the course of the two-week sit-in 1,252 people were arrested, including top climate scientists, landowners from Texas and Nebraska, former Obama for America staffers, First Nations leaders from Canada, and notable individuals including Bill McKibben, former White House official Gus Speth, NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, actor Daryl Hannah, filmmaker Josh Fox, and author Naomi Klein

…and me.” said Hicks

When pipeline advocates talk about rising demand, they ignore the fact that US oil consumption is on a steady decline. According to the Department of Energy, gasoline demand in the US will decline through 2030, because of efficiency standards. The US could reduce that by another 4 million barrels a day by requiring more efficient heavy trucks, airplanes, and buildings. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the reduction could be up to 7 million barrels a day.

You would be wrong to believe the Keystone XL pipeline will alleviate oil market fluctuations, or reduce the cost of oil. OPEC controls most of the world’s oil, and sets oil prices. Construction of the pipeline – a drop in the bucket of the world's oil market - will not change that.

“I thought often - as I endured my gentle and respectful treatment by the police, my mild deprivations, my inconveniences and moderate expenses - of those others, elsewhere and in other times, who have risked and too often suffered a nightmare version of what we were going through. And I am in awe. Still, what I did was out of the ordinary. It crossed the line into sacrifice.” wrote Hicks

The International Energy Agency shows that if we reduce our demand for oil in line with stabilizing climate change, OPEC revenues would be $5 trillion less over the next two decades. 

In 2007, CNA Corporation, a defense analysis operation, wrote, "climate change is a threat multiplier in already fragile regions, exacerbating conditions that lead to failed states -- the breeding grounds for extremism and terrorism."

In 2010, the Pentagon followed suit, writing in its Quadrennial Defense Review that global warming impacts and disasters will "act as an accelerant of instability or conflict."

Environment, Economy at Heart of Keystone XL Pipeline Debate 

"I responded to Bill McKibben’s invitation because of my deep concern about climate change. Wouldn’t you know it, that the day I am to participate, the focus turns out not to be on climate change but on indigenous rights, and on the harm being done to a small group of First Nations people in remote Alberta.

But wait, I came as an environmentalist, what does this have to do with indigenous rights? I think maybe the answer is that I came on the right day.

Bill quoted us this: “If you're comfortable with everybody at the table, your coalition is too small.

Friday morning, the day I was going to be arrested, I awoke from a dream in which I was late and disorganized. I showed up at the protest location without something essential and said I had to go back for it. But there was no time. The person I was explaining to gave me a stern and doubtful look, and asked in a patronizing tone, “What makes you think you are ready to cross the line?”

I guess I crossed the line.” Brian Hicks, Keystone XL Protester

Both mining and processing of tar sands involve a variety of environmental impacts, such as global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, disturbance of mined land, impacts on wildlife and air and water quality. 

You can read all of Brian Hicks Account Here:

http://dfilis.blogspot.com/2011/10/brian-hicks-personal-account-of-his.htm

Suggested reading for all protesters: 
Exercising Your Rights Of Political Protest In Washington, DC

Prepared by the Washington, DC Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild:

http://www.portaec.net/library/action/exercising_your_rights.html

Brian Hicks Personal Account Of His Arrest During The Keystone XL Protests in Washington, DC

In his own words...


My story is essentially one of a guy becoming an activist for the first time at age 60.  Maybe call me a “reluctant activist” or an “unlikely activist”? In any case, I’m not ‘one of those.’ No, it turns out that ordinary people can do this stuff.

So how about “Brian Hicks, 60-year-old first time activist” or maybe “reluctant activist”? That’s more like it.

By Brian Hicks, Reluctant Activist?

Over the course of the two-week sit-in 1,252 people were arrested, including top climate scientists, landowners from Texas and Nebraska, former Obama for America staffers, First Nations leaders from Canada, and notable individuals including Bill McKibben, former White House official Gus Speth, NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, actor Daryl Hannah, filmmaker Josh Fox, and author Naomi Klein.”

…and me.

Today I stood on the other side of the barrier, and clapped for each person being arrested. I waited (many of us did) for the last person and cheered him. This was the last day.

I won’t write about the tar sands or the Keystone XL pipeline. Others have done that better than I can. I will write about one of the protesters, the only one I’m qualified to write about.

I get it, that to do this is out of the ordinary. I get it when I hear or read what some of my friends have said to me. Lovely things. I got it when I was standing on the other side of the barricade this afternoon, looking at the people solemnly submitting to being handcuffed and loaded into police wagons.

That’s the point, I suppose. That it is out of my comfort zone: I do not disobey police orders. The notion of doing so, when I visualized it clearly for the first time a few days before my trip, was deeply unsettling. I had no idea how firm a part of my personality that is. I did not want to get arrested. I did not want to use my vacation time to fly to DC. I have other things I’d rather do with my money. This was a sacrifice.

So maybe that’s the point, then. Yes, that’s getting closer. Taking 30 seconds to sign a petition, or re-using a paper bag – these are not sacrifices. Why me, though?

(I must pause, before I go on, to get this out of the way: I thought often - as I endured my gentle and respectful treatment by the police, my mild deprivations, my inconveniences and moderate expenses - of those others, elsewhere and in other times, who have risked and too often suffered a nightmare version of what we were going through. And I am in awe. Still, what I did was out of the ordinary. It crossed the line into sacrifice.)

I did not think of the word “sacrifice” until just now. But I think it explains what I was doing and why. At the training the night before our action, they asked us to discuss with our buddy how climate change has affected us personally. When they asked for a few to share their experiences with the group, several discussed tangible changes in their own home areas. I have not observed that in the San Francisco Bay Area. But it has impacted me quite profoundly. It has robbed me of the peace of mind I so want to have from knowing that the earth will continue be an exquisite, generous planet long after I’m gone. It has caused me anguish when I think of the suffering that billions will endure as a result of our collective short-sighted and narrow-minded decisions and actions. I am very troubled. That’s been the impact on me. Some might argue that’s not a tangible impact. It is a very tangible impact.

I am privileged. I have enough – health, energy, time, and money - to offer some up as a sacrifice.

Benjamin Jealous, president of the NAACP, came to speak to my group at the training the night before we were to be arrested. It was an unexpected highlight of the event for me. Most memorably, he closed by saying, “Next time, come to us at the very beginning. We’ll help, we’ll stand with you.” It was the gentlest possible chiding of the organizers of this event, about a lost opportunity, and about our habitual ways of thinking. But mostly I felt it as hopefulness, even, in the language of the old Western movie cliché, like I had just heard that the cavalry was going to come riding in.

I responded to Bill McKibben’s invitation because of my deep concern about climate change. Wouldn’t you know it, that the day I am to participate, the focus turns out not to be on climate change but on indigenous rights, and on the harm being done to a small group of First Nations people in remote Alberta.

But wait, I came as an environmentalist, what does this have to do with indigenous rights and the NAACP? I think maybe the answer is that I came on the right day.

Bill quoted us this: “If you're comfortable with everybody at the table, your coalition is too small.”

The training was long and meticulous. We were there for four hours. A key message was that we were to be solemn and serious, as befits the issues, and that we were to be cooperative and respectful with the police. The point was made that anything one of us did to slow the process, or to aggravate the police, would just make it that much worse for those coming after us, and it is already going to be a very long, uncomfortable day for the last participants. We might even change the local climate enough that the police responded differently, with much larger fines, or jail, all of which is within their legitimate power to do. Of course it was also pointed out that the police were not our enemy and that undoubtedly some would be privately sympathetic to our message. I would add that they were going to be doing exactly what I want them to do.

That is, I want them to enforce our laws – that’s their job. I want them to serve us in that way even if it is me they need to arrest. And civil disobedience is about openly and willingly accepting the consequences of breaking a law.

On Friday, we arranged ourselves on the sidewalk where tourists take the souvenir photo of the White House, in rows, seated in front, standing in the back, some holding signs. And we remained that way. In doing so, we broke the law. We got the first warning from the police. After the second warning, those not willing to risk arrest quietly left. The third announcement from the police was that we were no longer allowed to leave, that we were under arrest.

The barriers and caution tape went up to isolate us. Crossing that line now would have been a significant offense. And then the slow process began. A few of the most frail were taken first, then the older women, then the rest of the women. After an hour and a half, the last woman was removed and they took the older men. I was standing with two ‘buddies’ (the result of a pairing up for us solo travelers that had taken place the evening before) who, like myself, were not young (I am 60). I confess we all three took some satisfaction that we had passed the test and had not been perceived as ‘old’. But it meant we stood longer.

Mostly, we stood quietly. At some point an officer came and advised us that we would be waiting quite a while and that if we’d like to sit, we could. We thanked him and some sat.

But there was some chanting as well, with call and response between us and the supporters in the park, behind the police vehicles and the barricades. I did not always participate, it seemed out of keeping with my intentions and attitude.

There were a few moments where we were to raise our fists, which made me very uncomfortable. Both were led by the group of first nations leaders at the front and center of our group. And when I thought of the immediate threats to them and their families and their land, and the violence done to them, even to the point of death, by the pollutants already in their drinking water, I chanted and even raised my fist once or twice. “If you're comfortable with everybody at the table, your coalition is too small.”

When it was clear that I was next, I said a quick word to my new friend King, who drove from Texas, stood and waited for the officer to motion to me. These were SWAT team police, very menacing and intimidating in their bearing and their attire. I stepped forward, turned and put my hands behind me so that he could put on the cuffs. Turned, I was looking back at my compatriots. A few solemn nods. Perhaps they applauded and maybe there was applause from across the street – as there certainly was the next day when I was on the other side. Oddly, I don’t remember. The cuffs are not police-movie handcuffs, but ‘flexi-cuffs’ a plastic strapping that is just as effective.

The officer held my upper arm and led me toward the processing tent and vehicles, saying “Watch your step”, as we came to the edge of the sidewalk. I said thank you. We stood like that for a few minutes, his hand on my arm, until he handed me off to another officer, a regular park police officer. Someone was holding me at all times throughout the process, until I was in the police van. I suppose that’s standard procedure when a suspect is in custody – you wouldn’t want them running away – but mostly it felt to me that they were there for my safety, because you are quite vulnerable when your hands are lashed behind your back.

A thorough pat-down, and more waiting. The rest is tedious detail that went on for two more hours – photographed while an officer held a sign with my number in front of me, answering questions, sitting in the police van, hands behind us, with the sections separated by wire mesh, the drive to the station, more standing, the relief of having the cuffs removed, more questions, handing over $100 (getting a receipt!), and being released. Although there was nothing noteworthy in all of this, I went through it in something of a state of heightened awareness, as might be imagined. It was all significant to me.

I walked up a ramp and opened a door, thinking I was going to the next step in the process, but instead finding myself outside. One of the volunteer organizers was nearby. He handed me my sign(!), the one with the number, and told me where to find the larger group. I caught up with the man in front of me and we approached the group to a small amount of cheering. There was water and a bit of food. I waited for my buddies and after a while we walked to the Metro and the day was over.

So what was that all about? Why did I do that, and so what?

I’ve exchanged emails with my buddies. I forwarded them these words from my daughter, “…this is AWESOME! Good for you. I'm bragging to all my friends about what you're doing!”

It warmed my heart, of course, but was just one example of something I only realized after it was all over: There is a bit of power we individuals gained by doing this: The power to get people to stop and think. It brings people up short when they understand that I flew across the country and got arrested for something I care very much about. It pierces the fog of the ordinary. I’m pretty much Clark Kent to most people. I imagine that people learning this about me would experience a thought something like, “Oh…If Brian is doing this…hmmm.”

That’s how it spreads.

Collectively, we sent a message to Obama, and quite broadly to organizations and people in the United States, Canada, and elsewhere.

Personally, I sent a message to my friends and family, and to 100 people on Facebook. My message was something like this: I care enough to sacrifice something (you might stop and think about that for a minute). I have decided that the time has come to say enough! (when will that point come for you?)

I think I sent a message to myself as well, that went something like this: Look at you! Maybe you aren’t quite who you thought you were. Maybe you have a little something in you that you didn’t know about. You’ve been fretting and hand-wringing, knowing all along that wasn’t really going to help. Maybe you’re becoming the kind of person who will go farther, who will make a sacrifice for the things you believe in and love.

Friday morning, the day I was going to be arrested, I awoke from a dream in which I was late and disorganized. I showed up at the protest location without something essential and said I had to go back for it. But there was no time. The person I was explaining to gave me a stern and doubtful look, and asked in a patronizing tone, “What makes you think you are ready to cross the line?”

I guess I crossed the line.

Mandatory Labeling for GMOs or An Immediate Ban?

By Theodora Filis

Each year, hundreds of children die from food allergies. Genetically modified foods (GMOs) contain proteins from other plants, making non-labeling a big concern for allergy sufferers. Because of lack of labeling people are now, unknowingly, exposed to substances that trigger allergies. For example, a tomato plant may contain a protein from peanuts – peanut allergy has more than doubled since 1997 -- concern is that if scientists create new proteins and put them into foods people who did not have food allergies before could begin to have reactions.

According to a 2007 study by the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, over 30,000 Americans are hospitalized due to food allergies each year.

Food allergies occur when a person's immune system reacts to a protein in a food he or she eats. The allergic response can be as mild as a slight stomach ache or as severe as anaphylactic shock.

Genetically-modified plants, animals and processed foodstuffs were introduced to the international marketplace in the 1990s. North American production of corn, soybeans and canola is now more than 50% with transgenic traits (herbicide tolerance or bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) resistance), while milk from the US is produced with recombinant bovine somatatrophin (rBST), and meat is being produced with various biotechnologically-based growth hormones.

Countries that regulate the introduction of GMO's are Canada, US, Mexico, Japan and the European Union (EU). Only the EU requires labels that specify the presence of GMOs. This potential "technical barrier to trade" poses challenges to producers, consumers and governments alike.

Over the past two decades there has been a 1500% increase in children diagnosed with autism.

Without proper labeling of GMOs, consumers lack consumer sovereignty and is unable to make 'rational consumption decisions.' Goods where consumers lack information are said to be 'credence goods' because there exists some degree of consumer uncertainty that cannot be factored into purchasing decisions (Bureau, et al., 1997).

The true credence good is one that may have harmful (or beneficial) effects that are not discernible at the point of consumption. In many cases the full impact is not known for a long period of time. Transfused blood tainted by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or beef infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) are two contemporary examples. In both cases the impacts of consuming those goods were not evident for years.

A report by the University of Saskatchewan, Canada said labeling products with words like "natural" or "naturally derived" does not mean the same as organic and does not mean the food does not contain GMOs.

Soy allergies jumped 50% in the UK just after GM soy was introduced.

The report goes on to suggest that “if GM soy was the cause, it may be due to several things. The GM protein that makes Roundup Ready Soy resistant to the herbicide does not have a history of safe use in humans and may be an allergen. In fact, sections of its amino acid sequence are identical to known allergens.”

Today, 6 million children have asthma. Asthma deaths have increased by 56 percent in the past two decades.

Asthma and breathing difficulties were reported by people who inhaled Bt-corn pollen. They also experienced swollen faces, flu-like symptoms, fever, and sneezing. Some individuals reported long-term effects after exposure.

There is a great deal of evidence of toxicity and reproductive effects associated with GM foods. Sheep that grazed on Bt-cotton plants in India, for example, exhibited nasal discharge, reddish and erosive mouth lesions, cough, bloat, diarrhea, and occasional red-colored urine. Shepherds report that 25% of their herds died within 5–7 days.

Rats fed Bt corn showed toxicity in their livers and kidneys. And farmers link Bt corn with deaths among cows, water buffalo, horses, and chickens, as well as sterility in thousands of pigs and cows.

Animal feeding studies with Roundup Ready soy indicated toxic livers, altered sperm cells, significant changes in embryo development, and a fivefold increase in infant mortality, among others.

Until we have the proper research and safeguards in place, the US government should not risk the health of the entire population with GMO frankenfoods or to release these crops into the ecosystem where they may self-propagate for generations.

An immediate ban of GM foods and crops is not only justified – it is imperative!

Mandatory labeling is clearly a threat to the continued development of biotechnology products and processes. Therefore, in the absence of industry action to positively label and preferably ban GMOs, governments must be pushed by consumers and groups to impose mandatory labeling to ensure companies like Monsanto are held accountable for the product-specific credence uncertainties.