Traduction de «dangers » (Français → Anglais) :

Recognizing hazards, making extraordinary efforts to eliminate the hazards, and preventing future hazards must be first and foremost, not developing administrative measures as a way to ignore the hazards in order to find a way to live or die with the risks.

...environments (including when surface water is frozen), particularly as raw bitumen is heavier than water; (q) what appropriate clean-up operations might, in case of a diluted bitumen spill, be required in terms of equipment, personnel, and supplies, compared to a spill of light sweet crude oil; (r) what are the likely economic and environmental costs of a diluted bitumen spill compared to a spill of light sweet crude oil; (s) how might a diluted bitumen spill impact human health, including, but not limited to, (i) potential impacts both in the short-term and the long-term of exposure to toxins, including benzene, hydrogen sulphide, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and n-hexane, (ii) potential impacts of exposure to toxins (such as ar ...[+++]senic, nickel, mercury and other heavy metals that do not biodegrade) that can bio-accumulate in the food chain; (t) what health and safety precautions does the government require emergency personnel to take when responding specifically to diluted bitumen spills; (u) what are all pipeline spills that have occurred from 1990 to 2010 in NEB-regulated pipelines, including (i) location, (ii) cause, (iii) affected area, (iv) environmental costs, (v) significant challenges to clean-up, (vi) impacts on human health, (vii) equipment, personnel and supplies required, (viii) economic costs; (v) what, if any, (i) research, (ii) action, (iii) investment has the government taken to evaluate the need for new Canadian pipeline safety regulations and standards that reflect the unique characteristics of diluted bitumen, and to restrict further diluted bitumen pipeline development until adequate safety regulations are in place; (w) what, if any, (i) research, (ii) action, (iii) investment has the government undertaken concerning changes to the design, operation and decommissioning of pipelines that may be necessary due to impacts of climate change, including but not limited to melting permafrost, changing moisture regimes, more severe storm events, increased incidence of forest fires, and slope instabilities; (x) what, if any, (i) research, (ii) action, (iii) investment has the government undertaken regarding the adoption of pipeline regulations and standards that require new pipeline routes to avoid landslide-prone routes, and that provide an adequate risk assessment for risks to pipelines arising from landslides and snow avalanches; (y) what, if any, (i) research, (ii) action, (iii) investment has the government undertaken to evaluate the risk of pipeline spills caused by multiple incidents happening at the same time, including worst-case scenarios; (z) what specific action and investment will the government take to ensure (i) that bitumen pipeline operators will fix safety problems identified at their facilities, (ii) that bitumen pipeline operators keep their emergency procedures up-to-date; (aa) what specific actions will the government take to ensure that pipeline companies which transport bitumen employ emergency-procedures manuals that adequately (i) identify the hazards posed by the operation of the pipelines, (ii) assess the risks posed by those hazards, (iii) map nearby residences and evacuation routes, (iv) describe and locate emergency response equipment, (v) identify any environmentally sensitive areas potentially affected by an incident, (vi) explain governmental roles in an emergency response; and (bb) in what ways, if any, must the emergency-procedures manuals referred to in sub-question (aa) differ from those concerning pipelines that do not carry bitumen? ...

The government's failure to support the Rotterdam Convention is so it does not have to take any responsibility for that end use, so it can continue to claim the product is safe, so it can continue not to have the product labelled for the kind of hazard it actually is, putting those workers at risk in other countries.

The substance meeting the criteria for classification as carcinogenic in Category 1A or 1B (assigned hazard phrases: H350 or H350i), germ cell mutagenic in Category 1A or 1B (assigned hazard phrase: H340), toxic for reproduction in Category 1A, 1B and/or 2 (assigned hazard phrases: H360, H360F, H360D, H360FD, H360Fd, H360fD, H361, H361f, H361d or H361fd), specific target organ toxic after repeated dose in Category 1 or 2 (assigned hazard phrase: H372 or H373), according to Regulation EC No 1272/2008;

On the 95th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, which the House has recognized, scholars have documented and the anguished testimony of survivors has affirmed, the whole reminding us of the dangers of indifference and inaction in the face of incitement and mass atrocity, of the dangers of a culture of impunity and of the dangers of revisionism and denial that led Hitler to remark, as he embarked on the Nazi genocide, “who today remembers the Armenians?”.

8. Considers that the scientific assessment of the risk must proceed logically in an effort to achieve hazard identification, hazard characterisation, appraisal of exposure and risk characterisation, with reference to procedures recognised at Community level and internationally, and that, owing to insufficient data and the nature or urgency of the risk, it may not always be possible to complete every stage systematically.