[lorend]

From the Hamilton Good Neighbour Campaign Facebook event:

Have 5 seconds? Great! That's all it takes to help us try and reduce the amount of B(a)P, a cancer-causing pollutant, that is currently being over emitted by ArcelorMittal-Dofasco.

VISIT HERE TO SIGN: http://www.goodneighbourcamp aign.ca/petition_hamilton

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
ArcelorMittal-Dofasco, has recently acknowledged that they are unable to meet current standards set out in Regulation 419/05 (an air quality standard made by the Ministry of Environment to protect our community's health and environment) and proposed standards currently being considered for inclusion in the regulation. As such, they are currently applying for an "alternative standard", which will allow them to continue to emit certain pollutants at higher levels than the regulation permits. The alternative standard comes with a requirement for the company to implement an action plan to reduce their emissions. The action plan would see reductions in two key pollutants that we feel are not good enough. Cancer-causing benzo(a)pyrene, emitted from the company’s coke ovens, will only be reduced by 27% over five years and total suspended particulate matter will only be reduced by 4% under the action plan.

As a community, we feel we deserve the best air possible! Thus, the Hamilton Good Neighbour Campaign, which is an initiative of Environment Hamilton, has been asking individuals to sign postcards. These postcards provide a way for individuals, groups, and organizations across the city to send a strong message to Mr. Juergen Schachler, CEO of ArcelorMittal-Dofasco – the message that, when it comes to cancer-causing pollutants, a 27% reduction is not good enough!

The intent of these postcards is to present them to the company at a community meeting which is to be set-up by the Ministry of the Environment. Here, the Ministry will announce their decision as to whether or not to grant the alternative standard, and what it will entail if granted. The Ministry has given us word that the meeting will take place on Thursday, May 20th, 2010 (time and place TBD). Thus, save the date! We welcome and ask that everyone and anyone come to this meeting to show community support for stronger reductions!

There will also be 3 pre-meetings to explain the situation and answer any questions:

• Pre-Meeting Option 1: Thursday May 13th @ Labour Council (1130 Barton Street E, second floor) - 7:00pm
• Pre-Meeting Option 2: Sunday May 16th @ Environment Hamilton Office (22 Wilson St, second floor) - 2:00pm
• Pre-Meeting Option 3: Monday May 17th @ Beach Rescue Unit (316 Beach Blvd) - 7:30pm

As much as I don't want cancer causing agents in the air, I only suspect that this means we'll be loosing even more jobs than Hamilton can't afford to loose.

Originally Posted by arathbon

As much as I don't want cancer causing agents in the air, I only suspect that this means we'll be loosing even more jobs than Hamilton can't afford to loose.

I wish more people would consider this because it is true. Hamilton has always depended on manufacutring for jobs, I would hate to see more companies shutting down and people without jobs because of complaints like these. At some point reducing emoissions will become too expensive for companies and theres nothing easier than shutting down operations and moving somewhere else. Please take that into account before signing any postcards.

Originally Posted by arathbon

As much as I don't want cancer causing agents in the air, I only suspect that this means we'll be loosing even more jobs than Hamilton can't afford to loose.

Ahh, the impermanency of our species.

My good brother, I can understand your point of view. We do need jobs, yes. We need high paying, secure and satisfying jobs for the citizens of this city.

Alternatively, if you will, look at the situation from this perspective. We need jobs. What kind of jobs? We need jobs that are economically sustainable in the long run. These kinds of antiquated methods of production are hardly sustainable in an economic climate where consumers are concerned for their health and the health of their children.

Keeping this in mind, I post the question again:

What kind of jobs do we need?

We need to balance the consumer's desire for goods and the consumer's desire for ecological conscience.

Therefore, we need what are called "Green Jobs". Arcelor Mittal and U.S. Steel are not in the business of providing those kinds of jobs. In today's shifting market, these employers are, for lack of a better phrase, doing nothing to halt their ever growing redundancy.

The city needs to actively engage in the recruitment of "Green Jobs" to Hamilton, that are sustainable both in their methods of production and the products they produce. Since Green Jobs are just starting to become desirable, they will be secure and stable places of employment that can provide the standard of living employees could have expected from the former Stelco and Dofasco in the mid 1950's.

So, for the libertarian, I provide a market alternative. Sign the petition, force Arcelor and U.S. Steel to change, or let them suffer the fate of the hundreds of other companies not willing to evolve to changing market demands.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Ahh, the impermanency of our species.

My good brother, I can understand your point of view. We do need jobs, yes. We need high paying, secure and satisfying jobs for the citizens of this city.

Alternatively, if you will, look at the situation from this perspective. We need jobs. What kind of jobs? We need jobs that are economically sustainable in the long run. These kinds of antiquated methods of production are hardly sustainable in an economic climate where consumers are concerned for their health and the health of their children.

Keeping this in mind, I post the question again:

What kind of jobs do we need?

We need to balance the consumer's desire for goods and the consumer's desire for ecological conscience.

Therefore, we need what are called "Green Jobs". Arcelor Mittal and U.S. Steel are not in the business of providing those kinds of jobs. In today's shifting market, these employers are, for lack of a better phrase, doing nothing to halt their ever growing redundancy.

The city needs to actively engage in the recruitment of "Green Jobs" to Hamilton, that are sustainable both in their methods of production and the products they produce. Since Green Jobs are just starting to become desirable, they will be secure and stable places of employment that can provide the standard of living employees could have expected from the former Stelco and Dofasco in the mid 1950's.

So, for the libertarian, I provide a market alternative. Sign the petition, force Arcelor and U.S. Steel to change, or let them suffer the fate of the hundreds of other companies not willing to evolve to changing market demands.

I have disagreed with you on more than one occasion in the past. I completely agree on this.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Ahh, the impermanency of our species.

My good brother, I can understand your point of view. We do need jobs, yes. We need high paying, secure and satisfying jobs for the citizens of this city.

Alternatively, if you will, look at the situation from this perspective. We need jobs. What kind of jobs? We need jobs that are economically sustainable in the long run. These kinds of antiquated methods of production are hardly sustainable in an economic climate where consumers are concerned for their health and the health of their children.

Keeping this in mind, I post the question again:

What kind of jobs do we need?

We need to balance the consumer's desire for goods and the consumer's desire for ecological conscience.

Therefore, we need what are called "Green Jobs". Arcelor Mittal and U.S. Steel are not in the business of providing those kinds of jobs. In today's shifting market, these employers are, for lack of a better phrase, doing nothing to halt their ever growing redundancy.

The city needs to actively engage in the recruitment of "Green Jobs" to Hamilton, that are sustainable both in their methods of production and the products they produce. Since Green Jobs are just starting to become desirable, they will be secure and stable places of employment that can provide the standard of living employees could have expected from the former Stelco and Dofasco in the mid 1950's.

So, for the libertarian, I provide a market alternative. Sign the petition, force Arcelor and U.S. Steel to change, or let them suffer the fate of the hundreds of other companies not willing to evolve to changing market demands.

I have yet to see a "green job" in the sense that "green market" evangelicals talk about them.

You can't make something from nothing. Resource jobs (whether through recycling, mining or harvesting renewable resources) and manufacturing will always be around. Steel manufacturing wasn't the same when it started and won't be the same one hundred years from now. But it is foolish to suggest that one day we'll wake up and see that no one needs steel anymore, unless other materials have come along to replace it, which also requires jobs to produce.

The fact is, when consumers are polled on whether they want to help the environment they say they would. Yet poll them on how much they're willing to accept as a cost to do so and you find that all of a sudden they develop a huge fondness for the cheap goods the railed against.

The biggest problem with environmental and labour regulations is the myriad of regimes throughout the world. As long as certain countries are willing to cut corners, the standards can only be raised so high before any manufacturing leaves. The alternate is to isolate Canada from the rest of the world, which, while allowing us complete freedom to set our own agendas, would limit the resources available to achieve these agendas.

In the end I guess what I'm saying is. We need to find a way to hold the cheap import steelmakers to high environmental and labour standards, rather than driving business to them, from our relatively responsible ones.

Guess I'll go tomrrow, saw this too late.

There is a difference between being an ardent adherent to the principles of the existing economic order and a force for general belligerency against moderately politically left suggestions concerning regulatory behavior and holding corporate interests accountable for their decisions.

I have failed to find any possible way in which not holding our own steel manufacturers accountable, as this petition seeks to do, will hold accountable the steel manufacturers of foreign nations with lax regulatory standards. Nor will avoiding any critique of Arcelor and US Steel ensure that they do not continue their rapid expedition of Canadian jobs and raw products to the pristine shores of the Global South where labour is cheap, regulations are few and the government is more than willing to service corporate needs.

Yes, we do need to hold foreign manufacturers to high standards to ensure global health and welfare are maintained. Canadian companies are not free from the same level of scrutiny though. This petition is one way in which one group is dealing with one aspect of one branch of the problem. It is a step in the right direction. Holding Arcelor and US Steel accountable is just as important a step as holding foreign based manufacturers accountable.

This is a moderate proposal, by all accounts. This is not one extreme of driving them from our city, gutting our economy but ensuring we have pristine air, nor is this the other extreme of suffering through elevated rates of cancer, in favour of ensuring the economy is secure. Neither are viable alternatives for this city.

This petition is an attempt to hold Arcelor to the existing standards. What could be more moderate than that? Our city deserves no less than clean air and a sound economy. This is not an argument over one or the other...this is a debate to determine how we achieve both.

This petition is just one solution.

Being a materials engineer with a focus on metallurgy, the first thing that comes into my head is that there may not currently be any efficient alternatives to this substance yet!

I'm sure they can limit to some extent, but just telling them to stop using this chemical is probably not going to do it. I'm not extremely familiar with this process, though I understand it is required when they process coke for use in the furnaces.

Perhaps there needs to be more R&D before it can be substituted completely.

It seems that this issue is not dealt with in this petition and it is asking people to sign because clean air is nice.

Does that make any sense? I'm rambling now

When something has a complex, scientific name and causes cancer, people rally against it. When it has a name like UV Rays, or meat, people flock towards it. Its definitely interesting how we justify this in our heads.

That said, the last thing Hamilton needs is more pollution, especially if it wants to stop scaring people away. And while manufacturing has been a traditional part of Hamilton's economy, Chris is right that it won't be sticking around for long, regardless of what we do here.