Tag: jeff

Turning Nuke Waste Sites Into Playgrounds

  • Grassland prairie flowers from Weldon Spring, part of the Department of Energy's restoration effort to control erosion and add aesthetic beauty to the area. (Photo courtesy of U.S. Department of Energy)

Across the U.S., there are more than 100 sites contaminated by radioactive waste from the nation’s nuclear weapons programs.
The government is trying to return these Cold War relics to safe and useful purposes. Some of these once toxic zones are being treated much like public parks. The GLRC’s Kevin Lavery visited one that was recently opened to the public:

Transcript

Across the US, there are more than 100 sites contaminated by radioactive waste from the
nation’s nuclear weapons programs. The government is trying to return these Cold War
relics to safe and useful purposes. Some of these once toxic zones are being treated much
like public parks. The GLRC’s Kevin Lavery recently visited one that was recently
opened to the public…


A thick grove of trees opens up to a clearing that reveals a white mound of limestone
rock. It rises like a tomb from some long-forgotten civilization, were it not for the water
towers and golf courses on the horizon.


Mike Leahy and his 9-year-old son Cameron came to this rock dome to catch the view
atop its 75 foot summit. But the real attraction was what they did not see:


“We read the sign and saw what was buried and how they did it, and – it’s kind of
disturbing, what’s in there.”


Beneath their feet lay more than a million cubic yards of spent uranium, asbestos and
PCB’s. The 45 acre mound is a disposal cell, where the government buried thousands of
barrels and tons of debris. That history didn’t bother young Cameron:


“It’s really cool. They keep all that nuclear waste under all that and it can’t harm
anybody.”


The Weldon Spring site, 30 miles west of St. Louis, Missouri began during World War
Two as an Army TNT factory. In the 1950’s, the plant refined yellow cake uranium for
later use in nuclear weapons. All that stopped in 1966 and all the radioactive waste just
sat there. Weldon Spring became an EPA Superfund site in 1987. After a 900 million
dollar cleanup, the site was opened to tourists in 2002.


(Sound of frogs)


Today, frogs sing in a native prairie at the foot of the cell. In April, officials opened a
hiking trail adjacent to a once-radioactive landfill. The route connects to a state park.


Weldon Spring is not a park per se, but project manager Yvonne Deyo says urban sprawl
prompted them to think like one:


“There’s subdivisions and lots of infrastructure going in…and that just kind of hits home
how important green space is, and that’s kind of what we’re trying to do a little bit of
here at the site.”


Weldon Spring is one of about 100 such sites the Department of Energy is converting to
what it calls “beneficial re-use.” Many are becoming recreational venues. Another
closed uranium plant near Cincinnati is adding horseback riding trails. In Wayne, New
Jersey, a former thorium processing facility is becoming a baseball field. And a national
wildlife preserve is in the works at Rocky Flats, the site outside Denver that made the
plutonium cores of nuclear warheads.


The Department of Energy says Weldon Spring is safe for visitors – though some residual
contamination remains.


(Sound of Burgermeister Spring)


Burgermeister Spring runs through a 7-thousand acre state reserve adjacent to the site.
This is where uranium-laced groundwater from Weldon Spring rises to the surface.
Though the spring exceeds the EPA’s drinking water quality standard, there’s no warning
sign here. Officials say the contamination is so low that it poses no immediate public
hazard. The spring feeds into one of the most popular fishing lakes on the property.
Most visitors are surprised to hear that:


“Huh.”


Jeff Boeving fishes for bass four or five times a month:


“(Does that concern you to hear that?) Yeah – absolutely…I mean, they’ve got a great
area out here and they’re kind of messing it up if they’re going to have contaminants, you know, going into it.”


The government’s vision of post-nuclear playgrounds is not without its critics. Arjun
Makhijani heads the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Takoma Park,
Maryland. He says recreational sites near urban development zones risk losing their
original purpose:


“Institutional memory tends to be very short; after 30, 40, 50 years people forget, they
begin to develop the land, and pretty soon you could have houses, farms and schools in
the area. So it’s not necessary that it will stay recreational forever.”


Recreation is only one option the Department of Energy is considering for all of its sites.
In the last two years, the agency’s budget has doubled with the addition of nearly a dozen
radioactive properties. Officials say Congress has so far supported its fiscal requests.
And with the future of a proposed permanent nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain still
in doubt, even more tax dollars will likely be spent converting the nuclear dumps in
America’s backyards to a place where families play.


For the GLRC, I’m Kevin Lavery.

Related Links

Signing Up Landowners for Wildlife Corridors

  • Planting hazelnut, red oak and other native species will produce nuts and acorns that many different kinds of animals will eat. Migration corridors connecting larger natural areas are critical for many kinds of animals. (Photo by Lester Graham)

There is growing concern about the loss of wildlife habitat. For decades, development has been spreading into areas that were once home to many different kinds of animals. The land has been cleared or altered so that a lot of the food sources have disappeared. The government has tried to set aside some parks and preserves, but biologists say many species of wildlife need much more space. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports that’s why more and more groups are approaching private landowners:

Transcript

There is growing concern about the loss of wildlife habitat. For decades
development has been spreading into areas that were once home to many
different kinds of animals. The land has been cleared or altered so that a
lot of the food sources have disappeared. The government has tried to
set aside some parks and preserves, but biologists say many species of
wildlife need much more space. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports
that’s why more and more groups are approaching private landowners:


(Sound of tree planting)


Ed Harris is digging into the dirt with a dibble bar… a tree planting tool.


“We’re planting American hazelnut seedlings. They grow vigorously
and produce nuts in about five years for white tail deer, turkey, grouse,
and even black bear.”


Harris owns this piece of land. He and his wife Elaine are getting a little
help planting the hazelnuts. A couple of young guys from neighboring
property are here, and a couple of guys from a not-for-profit organization
called Conservation Resource Alliance are working too. Ed Harris says
he’s in a partnership with that group…


“We wanted to improve the wildlife habitat. That was one of our goals
and that was one of the reasons we got together with Conservation
Resource Alliance to enhance the area. You know, you hear of so much
development now and taking trees and cutting them and bulldozing. Do
we want to see the land in condominiums or rather see it in a natural
state? And that was an easy choice for us.”


But it’s not so easy for some other private land owners. It’s really
tempting to sell scenic land like this to developers who offer big bucks.


Those who don’t sell often want to improve the land for wildlife, but that
can be expensive. There are government programs… but, a lot of the
time private landowners are reluctant to sign up. They don’t like the
bureaucratic red tape… and some don’t like idea of a government agency
telling them what they can or cannot do with their own land.


Groups like the Conservation Resource Alliance – the CRA for short –
are aware of that reluctance and that’s why they approach landowners
carefully.


Jeff Brueker is with the CRA. He says they don’t come in with a plan…
they sit down with the landowner. He’s been working on a plan with Ed
Harris for a couple of years.


“And when we can meet with a landowner that has some of those same
goals in mind and we can come to an agreement on some of their goals
matching with our goals, then we’ll go into a partnership together and
work at that.”


The goals include keeping certain wildlife travel areas – especially along
streams – inviting to wildlife so animals such as black bears, otters and
bobcats can migrate from one large natural area to another.


Brueker says this approach works because his organization and the
landowner work together to make it happen… including spending days
like this… planting hazelnuts and American red oak trees that will
provide food for wildlife for years to come. Brueker says this kind of
effort will probably mean long term protection of the property…


“In other words, if we help a landowner plant a hundred oaks on his land,
he’s looking at those 20 years later, showing that to his heirs, saying
‘Look, I planted those trees; I’ve been watching how they’ve been
growing,’ it just helps leave a legacy on the land.”


But getting one landowner to establish better wildlife habitat is not
enough. These kinds of groups are trying to build larger wildlife
corridors. That means they want Ed Harris… and they want his
neighbors… and their neighbors… to establish a huge area of food and
habitat for wildlife.


Programs across the country go by a lot of different names. The CRA
calls its program “Wild Link.”


Jeff Brueker’s colleague, Matt Thomas, says it’s connecting the dots
between properties, and… getting the private landowners on board takes
time…


“It’s kind of a door-to-door, kitchen table sort of recruitment. We start
by literally knocking on doors, doing presentations to groups that can
maybe share that information. We rely heavily on neighbor-to-neighbor
contact, where one landowner is having some successes and some
excitement about participating with Wild Link, they’re inclined to tell
their neighbors that ‘Hey, the connections work, if you can participate
too.'”


Groups like the Conservation Resource Alliance note that working with
private landowners is a critical piece of the puzzle in restoring wildlife
habitat. Of the one-point-nine billion acres in the lower 48 states, one-
point-four billion is in private hands. That’s 72 percent… nearly three
out of every four acres on average. Without private landowners lending
a hand… habitat for wildlife would be limited to isolated pockets in
government owned parks.


For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Scientists Buff Up Their Tinseltown Image

When we go to the movies, we expect to escape from reality. Visiting aliens, time travel, extinct animals coming back to life… that’s the dazzling stuff blockbusters are made of. But not everybody is thrilled by the way scientists look in the movies. The GLRC’s Rebecca Williams has the story of screenwriters who want to make movie scientists a little less weird:

Transcript

When we go to the movies, we expect to escape from reality. Visiting
aliens, time travel, extinct animals coming back to life, that’s the dazzling
stuff blockbusters are made of. But not everybody is thrilled by the way
scientists look in the movies. The GLRC’s Rebecca Williams has the
story of screenwriters who want to make movie scientists a little less
weird:


(Theme music from “Back To The Future”)


So Dr. Frankenstein and Doc Brown from “Back to the Future” are a
little… freaky. But they’re smart… and enterprising. But those kinds of wacky
movie scientists make real life scientists hurl their popcorn.


Researcher Paula Grisafi says movie stereotypes about scientists are actually
worse than those about lawyers or politicians.


“My sense of movies about scientists is that there are maybe 10% good
guys and 90% bad guys. Or not even just bad guys but misguided, even
when they’re trying to be good, they’re usually sufficiently misguided
that what they start out to do turns out wrong.”


Paula Grisafi says there are a few oddballs in real science labs, but she says her peers are really much more normal.


Really — instead of hair frizzing out of control… they have nice haircuts. And they never, ever wear pocket protectors. Grisafi’s day job is at MIT in
Cambridge, but she’s also an aspiring screenwriter. She’s working on
scripts that she says shake up the Hollywood stereotypes.


“These sort of scientist archetypes are Frankenstein and Jekyll and Hyde.
They’re people who were loners obsessed with their work to the point of
being a danger to themselves or to others. It’s usually frowned upon in
science to experiment on yourself.”


Take Jeff Goldblum’s character Seth Brundle, in “The Fly.” When
Brundle tests his transport machine on himself, the experiment backfires.
Brundle becomes a genetic mutant, but he’s kinda proud of it.


“Am I becoming an 185 pound fly? No, I’m becoming something that
never existed before! I’m becoming Brundle-Fly! Don’t you think that’s
worth a Nobel Prize or two?”


Maybe Brundle should’ve stopped when he turned that baboon inside out.


Paula Grisafi admits there are a few movies that show scientists as
somewhat normal people. Jodie Foster’s character in “Contact” for
example. But Grisafi says there aren’t enough to balance out the weirdos.
She says at worst, distorted images of scientists might give audiences the
impression that science is more dangerous than good.


So Grisafi jumped at the chance to be part of a screenwriting workshop
for scientists in LA last summer. It was an intense crash course with
sessions called Plot and Character, and of course, Agents and Managers.


The workshop was dreamt up by Martin Gundersen. He’s an electrical
engineer who’s had a brush with fame. He added credibility to Val
Kilmer’s lasers in the film “Real Genius.”


“I’ve met people now who are young faculty members who have told me
they were influenced by that picture to think seriously about science.”


Martin Gundersen says if the scientists in movies were more appealing,
more people might want to go into the sciences. He says the Defense
Department and companies like Boeing are really concerned that fewer
people want careers in science and engineering. In fact, Gundersen
actually landed money from the Pentagon for the workshop.


But Gundersen admits he’s still testing the theory that scientists can be
screenwriters.


“Oh it’s impossible (laughs). That’s the thing – you can’t promise that
somebody’s going to get their picture made. To me the truest cliché in
Hollywood is that everyone has a script.”


And so, can chemists and engineers possibly compete?


One box office expert says — sure. Paul Dergarabedian is president of
Exhibitor Relations Company in LA. He says scientists have as good a
chance as anyone at selling a script… as long as their stories are
compelling.


“And it’s the more interesting characters who bring that scientific
element, or you have a scientist who’s not the typical nerdy scientist. He
might be more of a sophisticated kind of character in terms of lets say a ladies’
man or something like that you wouldn’t necessarily expect.”


And actually, there is a ladies’ man in one of Paula Grisafi’s scripts. Her
story features two rivals thrown together to figure out why sea life is
dying. The stars of the story are a lovely young marine ecologist and a
hotshot microbiologist from Norway. Grisafi’s been advised that playing
up the romance might help sell the story.


“I guess I was sort of writing for a PG audience. I spent eight years in
Catholic girls’ school so I’m not sure how competent I’m going to be to
write really steamy sex scenes, but I’ll make an effort.”


Grisafi says even if she never sells a script, she’ll still get up at 5 a.m. to
write, and then she’ll put in a full day at the lab.


These new screenwriters hope to prove you don’t have to be a mad
scientist or a loner in the lab to invent movies that sell tickets.


For the GLRC, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Budget Cuts to Close Epa Libraries?

An environmental watchdog group is criticizing President Bush’s proposal to slash funding for the Environmental Protection Agency’s library system. The GLRC’s Sarah Hulett reports:

Transcript

An environmental watchdog group is criticizing President Bush’s
proposal to slash funding for the Environmental Protection
Agency’s library system. The GLRC’s Sarah Hulett reports:


The proposed budget would cut two million of the two-and-a-half
million dollars that pays for EPA’s libraries and reading rooms.


Internal EPA memos suggest the cuts could close EPA’s main
library and some of its regional libraries, and shut down the
system’s electronic catalog.


Jeff Ruch is with Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility. He says the proposed cuts threaten an invaluable
resource the serves government scientists and the public.


“And so for reports on particular sites – like for example:
contaminated sites or Superfund sites – they’re the only place in
the world where you can get some of the detailed investigations
that have been done.”


An EPA spokeswoman says the agency plans to make its physical
collections more widely available online, but it’s not clear how the
agency will pay for digitizing the documents.


For the GLRC, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links

Report: Toxic Chemicals Inside Cars

A new study by an environmental group says there are high
concentrations of toxic chemicals called PBDE’s and phthalates inside many cars. The Ecology Center is calling for the chemicals to be phased out. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy
Samilton reports:

Transcript

A new study by an environmental group says there are high
concentrations of toxic chemicals called PBDEs and phthalates inside
many cars. The Ecology Center is calling for the chemicals to be phased
out. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton reports:


PBDEs are used as flame retardants in auto parts, and phthalates make
plastic parts more flexible. The study found that the heat that builds up
inside a car in the sun causes the chemicals to be released, which
increases exposure to humans.


Jeff Gearhart of the Ecology Center says there are plenty of safer
alternatives and the auto industry should use them. He says there are not
many studies on the effect of the chemicals on humans, but animal
studies show that they hurt reproduction and brain development.


“We should take a precautionary approach and we think that’s the
type of approach that many people take in their own lives.”


A spokesperson for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers says
flame retardant PBDEs make cars safer for people in the event of a fire,
and that PBDEs and phthalates are both safe.


For the GLRC, I’m Tracy Samilton.

Related Links

Corporate Marketing in National Parks?

The National Park Service is deciding whether to recognize corporate donors through plaques or banners in national parks. Some environmentalists are slamming the proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin Toner
reports:

Transcript

The National Park Service is deciding whether to recognize corporate
donors through plaques or banners in national parks. Environmentalists
are slamming the proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erin
Toner reports:


The National Park Service proposal says private donations could be
recognized in the form of nameplates, donor walls or commemorative
plaques. It says under no circumstances would company slogans or
logos be allowed.


Jeff Ruch is the director of Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility. He’s afraid the change would lead to the
commercialization of national parks. Ruch also says his group has been
contacted by parks managers who fear the policy would make them
salespeople.


“They went into the parks service to work with nature, not to be a
fundraiser, and under these new rules, the workforce, the rangers and the
custodians, may be transformed into a sales force.”


But a spokesman for the Park Service says workers would not be asked
to raise money. Al Nash says the proposal provides strong direction for
parks managers to find appropriate ways to recognize philanthropy.


For the GLRC, I’m Erin Toner.

Related Links