Canadian environmental groups say the American demand for fossil fuels is harming Canada’s environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Transcript
Canadian environmental groups say the American demand for fossil fuels is harming
Canada’s environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Environmentalists say Canada’s oil industry is booming. Natural gas production
increased by 70% over the past decade. And oil production went up by 50%.
Canada is now the single largest supplier of fossil fuels to the United States. John
Bennett of the Sierra Club of Canada says that increase in fuel production and
consumption is harmful for both humans and wildlife.
“What we get is air pollution, 16 thousand premature deaths every year. We also have
huge loss of habitat and biodiversity.”
Environmentalists are especially concerned about a proposed pipeline through the
Canadian arctic. They’re also fighting to maintain a moratorium on drilling off the coast
of British Columbia.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
Across the country, forests, streams and coastlines are getting extra doses of nutrients containing the element nitrogen. Researchers say the long-term impact of these unwanted compounds on the environment could be serious. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Daniel Grossman reports on some efforts to reduce nitrogen pollution:
Transcript
Across the country, forests, streams and coastlines are getting extra doses of nutrients
containing the element nitrogen. Researchers say the long-term impact of these unwanted compounds on the environment could be serious. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Daniel Grossman reports on some efforts to reduce nitrogen pollution:
A thunderstorm soaks the land and lights the sky. The electric jolts of the lightning change nitrogen in the air into compounds needed for plants to grow. Lightning, as well as microbes in the soil, converts annually nearly 100 million tons of atmospheric nitrogen into plant nutrients. Humans make the same compounds in factories and call them fertilizer, a mainstay of agriculture. Between these synthetic chemicals and a smaller quantity of related compounds produced when fossil fuels are burned, humans produce more nitrogen-rich nutrients than nature makes on the seven continents. University of Minnesota ecologist David Tilman says such extra nutrients are a concern.
“Right now half or more of the nitrogen we put on a farm field just washes through the soil and down into the groundwater into lakes, rivers, streams and into the ocean.”
This wasted nitrogen often travels great distances causing widespread damage. Tilman says on land, the nutrients cause exotic weeds to outgrow native plants. In the ocean, the nutrients cripple critical habitats. The ecologist says nitrogen pollution must be cut. One place to start is on the farm.
“We have to find some way to grow crops where the crops take up much more of the nutrients that we apply.”
(Sound of walking through grass. Quiet bird calls in background.)
Near Chesapeake Bay, farmer and agricultural scientist Russ Brinsfield walks across a patch of tall dry grass.
We’re on the edge of a field, about a sixty-acre field of corn, on the beautiful Eastern Shore of Maryland.
This field is a research plot at the Maryland Center for Agro-Ecology. Here Brinsfield is studying agriculture’s environmental impact. Chesapeake Bay’s waters have high concentrations of farmer’s nutrients, causing blooms of the toxic algae Pfiesteria. The pollution has also caused declines in sea grass beds. Brinsfield says solutions to the problem fall into two categories.
“The first series of practices are those practices that we’ve been able to demonstrate that by a farmer implementing them he can reduce his inputs without affecting his outputs… that at the end of the year have added profit to his bottom line.”
For instance, testing the soil’s nitrogen level before fertilizing. And splitting fertilizer applications into two doses rather than one so that nutrients are added only when plants need them. Such simple measures are good for environment and the bottom line. Brinsfield says in the last 10 years most farmers on the Eastern Shore of Maryland have cut fertilizer use this way. Then there’s the other category of improvements.
“We’re going to have to do some things-ask some farmers to do some things-that may cost them more to do than what they are going to get in return from that investment.”
For example, in the winter, many fields here are fallow and bare. That means top soil erodes when it rains, taking with it residual fertilizer. It wasn’t always this way.
“I can remember my dad saying to me, ‘every field has to be green going into the winter, Son.’ So all of our fields were planted with rye or wheat or barley. It served two purposes. First, the animals grazed it. And second, it held the soil intact.”
And intact soil retains its fertilizer. Such winter cover crops also prevent fertilizer loss by storing nutrients in plant leaves and stalks. This used to be dairy country and cover crops grazed by cows made economic sense. Now farmers mostly grow grains. Planting a cover crop could cut nitrogen flow from farms by 40 percent but it costs farmers about $20/acre and provides no economic benefit to them. Brinsfield says farmers need an incentive.
“For the most part, farmers are willing to participate and to do those things that need to be done, as long as they can still squeak out a living.”
To help them squeak out a living, the state pays some farmers to sow cover crops. The state also pays them to plant buffers of grass and trees that suck up nutrients before they leave the farm. Today farms in six states that are part of the Chesapeake’s huge watershed contribute about 54 million pounds of nitrogen to the bay. The goal is to cut this figure approximately in half by two thousand and ten. Robert Howarth, a marine biologist and expert on nitrogen pollution at Cornell University, says though ambitious, this target can be achieved.
“I think most of the problems from nitrogen pollution have relatively straightforward technical fixes. So the real trick is to get the political will to institute these.”
Howarth says much of the nitrogen problem could be eliminated with a blend of government subsidies and regulations. But more will be needed as well… solutions of a more personal nature.
(sound of Redbones Barbeque)
There’s a pungent, smoky aroma in the air at Redbones Barbeque in Somerville, Massachusetts. The crowded bistro serves up a variety of ribs, chicken, sausage and other meats, dripping with savory sauces. University of Minnesota ecologist David Tilman says when someone eats a meal they are responsible for the little share of fertilizer a farmer somewhere had to apply to grow a crop. If the meal is from farm-raised animals, like the heaping plates of meat served here, the amount of fertilizer is much greater than if it’s from plants.
“It takes from three to ten kilograms of grain to produce a single kilogram of meat.”
Tilman says if Americans ate less meat, they could dramatically reduce fertilizer usage. However, per capita consumption is rising. Meat consumption is on the rise globally as well. David Tilman would like that to change. He says if current trends continue, human production of nitrogen nutrients will grow to triple or quadruple what nature makes on all Earth’s lands. Professor Tilman says that in many places the impact on the environment would be catastrophic.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Daniel Grossman.
Father Charles Morris installed a solar-wind hybrid system to make his parish less dependent on fossil fuels for energy. Other congregations across the country are taking similar steps to be more energy efficient. Photo by Arthur Cooper.
Even before September 11th, energy policy was being fiercely debated in the U.S. Now, such a policy has taken on even greater importance, and President Bush is again promoting what many environmentalists view as an outdated energy plan. They say his focus on renewable energy is insufficient. And protest against the plan is gathering speed. But some may be surprised at who’s helping to lead the way. Many religious leaders are voicing concern about America’s dependence on fossil fuels. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams has the story:
Transcript
Even before September 11th, energy policy was being fiercely debated in the U.S. Now, such a policy has taken on even greater importance, and President Bush is again promoting what many environmentalists view as an outdated energy plan. They say his focus on renewable energy is insufficient. And protest against the plan is gathering speed. But some may be surprised at who’s helping to lead the way. Many religious leaders are voicing concern about America’s dependence on fossil fuels. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams has the story:
(natural sound of birds, street sounds, wind)
Twenty minutes before Father Charles Morris will listen to confessions, he’s up on the rectory roof… inspecting his new solar panels and windmill. He’s perched three stories above the ground, so he has a clear view of his neighborhood here in Wyandotte, Michigan. It’s a sunny afternoon. But for as far as he can see, his roof is the only one that’s turning the sunlight into electricity. And he wants to change that.
“Even in a working class, industrial area such as Wyandotte, an inner ring suburb, if it can work here, it can work anywhere. If you would have homes all across the Detroit area, across Michigan, across other communities, that were to adopt this model, I think it would have a profound impact on the stress we’re placing on nonrenewable resources.”
Father Morris’ parish, St. Elizabeth Roman Catholic, is among the first congregations in the U-S to draw energy from the sun and wind. But he’s not alone in his mission to expand the use of clean energy throughout America.
Across the country, religious leaders are writing to Congress, rallying at SUV dealerships, and making their houses of worship more energy efficient.
St. Elizabeth is a winner of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Energy Star award. Four other congregations also won this year’s award, including a Sikh temple in Illinois, and a Lutheran church in Iowa.
This past June, Father Morris was up on his roof, standing above a gathering of 70 people. For those watching, the day held some miracles.
“During the blessing of the solar panels, it was a bright sunny day, no wind, and no wind all morning. But the moment that the prayer had finished for the blessing of the solar panels, and they were switching over to the blessing for the wind generator, and I walked over with the holy water to bless it, this gust of wind comes out of nowhere, and it starts to spin, just as it’s beginning to spin right now (windmill whirs).” “It was incredible, and people were going, ‘ooh, ahh.'”
While using alternative energy sources has immediate benefits at home, leaders such as Father Morris hope that enough people will save energy locally to have a broader impact.
Not only on energy policy but also on energy practices around the globe.
There are 18 Interfaith Global Warming Campaigns in the U.S. Kim Winchell directs the one in Michigan. Her group is concerned that America is ignoring global warming. Electricity generated from fossil fuel releases emissions that add to global warming. So Winchell’s group wants Americans to use less fossil fuel. Muslim, Jewish, and Christian leaders have joined the effort, which Winchell says fits their beliefs.
“All faiths – Christian, Muslim, Jewish – teach that life is sacred, and the created world is given into our keeping by God.”
But should all congregations run on alternative energy?
Critics say that solar and wind energy are not practical for poor or working-class neighborhoods such as the one served by St. Elizabeth because such systems cost thousands of dollars to install. But Father Morris believes in the long-term, the investment is worth it.
“Every dollar you save on energy is a dollar you can feed a hungry person, a dollar you can pay an employee a just wage, a dollar you can do outreach.”
To pay for his hybrid system, Father Morris took a risk – and drew from the parish savings. It may take 12-15 years to see a return on his investment. So he says some churches may hesitate to follow his example.
U-S Representative David Bonior attended the blessing at St. Elizabeth. He thinks the federal government should invest in renewable energy.
“We ought to provide some incentive, not only for churches, but for anybody who institutes energy wise devices. The government has a central role to play in moving us to a more efficient, technologically safer and cleaner environment.”
Some states are already offering incentive programs and grants. But the amount varies, because state energy conservation usually depends on federal funding.
Father Morris just got a grant from the state of Michigan. He used it to put in a solar thermal system to heat water. He’s also inviting schools and churches to tour St. Elizabeth.
“This is the living room; we’ve got the TV on at the moment…” (sounds of football game)
Father Morris lives in the rectory, and his entire first floor runs on solar and wind power. That includes his living room, bedroom, four offices, two computers…and a radio.
“Here’s one of those old fashioned radio/stereos. We’ll have to put the radio on and see what’s on.”
(sound of pop music)
“I don’t know what that stuff is.”
(sound of rapid change between stations)
“You see, this is being powered by solar right now and so the quality of life is the same, there’s no change.”
President Bush’s new energy plan is now being considered by Congress. But whatever the government does, Father Morris says the role for people of faith is clear: to be witnesses for the nation, one windmill at a time.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Rebecca Williams.
Chicago is the first major city in the U.S. to commit to a carbon emissions trading system. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Chicago is the first major city in the U.S. to commit to a carbon emissions trading system. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has announced that the municipality would join two-dozen private companies that have signed on with the Chicago Climate Exchange. The exchange will create a market in carbon dioxide emissions futures. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Daley is recommending the city take a new approach to energy; replacing the bulbs in traffic signals with new longer-lasting, brighter, but more energy efficient bulbs. He also wants the city to put in more energy efficient boilers, and increase the use of cleaner-burning alternative fuels in the city’s fleet of cars and equipment. The city will be able to trade any savings in carbon emissions for shares in carbon futures, supplementing city coffers. The mayor admonished business leaders to find creative solutions to energy and environmental problems, such as the Chicago Climate Exchange. Although the city government buildings and cars make up only a small fraction of the city’s pollution sources, the mayor’s initiative is expected to be an example for the private sector. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Lester Graham.
Not too long ago, the fall harvest season was celebrated for its bounty of locally grown fresh fruits and vegetables. Thanks to the globalization of our food system, we can now buy fresh produce 365 days of the year. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says the end result is that most of us have no idea where our food actually comes from:
Transcript
Not too long ago, the fall harvest season was celebrated for its
bounty of locally grown fresh fruits and vegetables. Thanks to the
globalization of our food system we can now buy fresh produce 365
days of the year. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne
Elston says the end result is that most of us have no idea where our
food actually comes from.
As a kid I grew up near the Okanagan Valley near Canada’s west coast.
The area was famous for its fruit trees. During harvest time, my
parents would stop at a roadside stand and buy a basket of cherries
and put then in the back seat for my sister and I to entertain
ourselves with. The first thing we’d do is look for double hung
cherries to hang over our ears like drop earrings. Then we’d bite one
of the cherries and use the sweet juice to paint our lips and cheeks.
We’d throw back our heads and do our very best Marilyn Monroe
impression before diving into the remaining fruit. We’d fill our
mouths to the point of bursting, and then spit the pits at each
other, giggling and laughing in a fit of harvest bliss.
This delicious ritual remains carefully etched in my mind because
it’s so rare today. My kids can eat fresh fruits and vegetables from
around the world on virtually any day of the year. They’ve already
tasted things that I didn’t even know existed when I was a kid –
kiwis from New Zealand, exotic star fruits and Jamaican plantain for
example.
On the surface, this seems like a good thing. Thanks to international
trade and modern storage technologies, we are no longer restricted by
local growing seasons and soil conditions. But in having so much,
we’ve actually lost sight of the process of growing food. Most of us
are about three generations away from having to go to the henhouse to
pick up the eggs on the family farm. And if our ancestors didn’t
actually grow their own food, they purchased it from a neighbor who
did.
Today instead of going out in the back garden and picking a tomato
for dinner, the tomato that ends up on your supper plate may have
traveled thousands of miles by truck. It’s then delivered to a
distribution center, shipped by yet another vehicle to your local
supermarket, and then given a ride home in the back of the family
van. This idea of being removed from our food source is something
called distancing.
Distancing not only adds to the cost of food, but it also places a
heavy toll on the environment. Trucking fresh produce across vast
distances burns a whole lot of fossil fuel – a major contributor to
both global warming and smog. Some of the countries that we import
produce from don’t have the same strict guidelines that we do about
pesticides. The result is that along with fruits and vegetables, in
some cases we’re also importing chemicals such as DDT that we banned
decades ago.
And then there’s the produce itself. Although it’s technically fresh,
it has to be picked long before it’s ripe in order to survive the
journey. Then it spends several days – or perhaps even weeks – before
it shows up on store shelves. Sure it looks great, but for those of
us who have experienced the taste of freshly picked fruit, it’s not
even in the same ballpark.
Which is perhaps why cherry is now my least favorite flavor. It’s so
far removed from the delicious cherries of my childhood, that I’d
rather not taste it.
