A scientist has discovered a chemical compound that attracts
an invasive fish. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson
reports that this could be a breakthrough in controlling harmful fish
populations:
Transcript
A scientist has discovered a chemical compound that attracts an invasive fish. The
Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports that this could be a break through in
controlling
harmful fish populations:
Eurasian ruffe were introduced in the Duluth-Superior harbor from ballast water of
ocean-going
ships in the 1990’s. Ruffe reproduced so quickly, they now make up 80 to
90-percent of the fish
population, squeezing out native fish. Now, they’re spreading eastward across Lake
Superior
toward the lower Great Lakes.
University of Minnesota Fisheries Professor Peter Sorenson says he’s isolated a
pheromone that
will cause the fish to cluster in great numbers of male ruffe who are tricked into
thinking it’s time
to mate.
“It causes a great deal of sexual arousal and excitement. So to help detect this
thing, I suppose
like a dog they get a little crazy and just start swimming around like crazy and
nudging and
inspecting the fish in the tank.”
Once they’re clustered, Sorenson says it may be possible to find a way to cut their
population.
Sorenson hopes to find a similar pheromone in carp and sea lamprey, other invasive
species
which threaten native fish in the Great Lakes.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mike Simonson.
New research shows that chemicals used to repel food, stains, and water are sticking just about everywhere else in the environment. They were recently found in the Great Lakes. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports, their discovery was not a surprise:
Transcript
New research shows that chemicals used to repel food, stains, and water are
sticking just about everywhere else in the environment. They were recently found
in the Great Lakes. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett
reports, their discovery was not a surprise:
The chemicals are called perfluoronated compounds. They’re used in products
like Teflon, Scotchgard, and Gore-Tex. They’ve been detected in animals from
Arctic polar bears to seals and birds in the Baltic.
Matt Simcik is a researcher at the University of Minnesota. His studies turned up
the chemicals in lake trout from all five Great Lakes. Simcik says a likely source
for the contaminants is wastewater treatment plants.
“Because these chemicals are used in everyday use – textiles and carpets and
things. And when you wash your clothes, or wash your carpet, that water gets
into the waste system, and eventually ends up in the lake.”
The effects of the chemicals on humans is the subject of intense debate – but at
high exposures they’ve been linked to problems including birth defects and
cancer .
One of the two known chemicals has been phased out of use. Federal regulators
are looking at the other to determine whether it should be restricted as well.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.
Hydrogen fuel cells may be the energy of the future, but so far the hydrogen to power them has only been made from fossil fuels. Now, researchers at the University of Minnesota have come up with a way to make hydrogen from a renewable fuel – ethanol, made from corn. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:
Transcript
Hydrogen fuel cells may be the energy of the future, but so far the hydrogen to power them has
only been made from fossil fuels. Now, researchers at the University of Minnesota have come up
with a way to make hydrogen from a renewable fuel – ethanol, made from corn. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:
Researchers published their findings in a recent issue of Science magazine.
Lanny Schmidt is a chemical engineer at the University of Minnesota. He says his team has
created a simple system. A fuel injector forces ethanol through a catalyst. The catalyst then
converts the ethanol into hydrogen and carbon dioxide.
Schmidt says because ethanol is made from corn, it doesn’t contribute to the greenhouse effect.
“We’re now just using that ethanol as a gasoline additive. What we’re proposing here is to use
this ethanol as a transportable liquid fuel to use in fuel cells, which have two or three times the
efficiency of simple combustion.”
Schmidt says early applications could include producing electricity at remote locations like
cabins.
He’s applied for a patent, and hopes a private company will commercialize the technology.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.
According to the USDA, 40% of the corn grown this year in the U.S. has been genetically modified. Some researchers fear there's not enough oversight on the rapidly growing biotech industry. A program at the University of Minnesota wants to create a new profession - the 'Biosafety Engineer.' (photo courtesy of the USDA)
Genetic engineering – especially when it comes to food – is a battleground. On one side: people who fear a world of contaminated food, harming humans and the environment. The other side fears we’ll miss an opportunity to prevent hunger and disease. Now there’s a ground breaking initiative that might produce compromise. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports that some researchers think safety can be built into the bio tech industry:
Transcript
Genetic engineering – especially when it comes to food – is a
battleground. On one side: people who fear a world of contaminated
food, harming humans and the environment. The other side fears
we’ll miss an opportunity to prevent hunger and disease. Now, there’s
a ground breaking initiative that might produce compromise. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky reports that some researchers
think safety can be built into the bio tech industry:
To remove a gene from one organism and transfer it to another…
that’s genetic engineering. Genetically modified or GM crops are
easier to grow, according to bio tech supporters and in the future
might be more nutritious. But they also might contain hidden
allergens, because they use genes from a plant or animal that
people might be allergic to. And there are concerns that GM crops
might harm the environment by crossbreeding with natural plants in
the wild. And so the University of Minnesota is proposing a
solution – an entirely new profession – call them biotech safety
engineers – along with a new science of bio safety. Anne
Kapuscinski is a researcher at the University of Minnesota and a
force behind the initiative called Safety First. Kapuscinski says
rather than regulating the industry after a new product is developed,
companies should prove safety first.
“It will mean that some ideas that will be on the lab bench won’t go
any further in development because the developers
will realize there are safety concerns that we don’t know how to
mitigate, or how to prevent from happening or how to address.”
And that could save companies money… by avoiding costly mistakes
such as the Starlink corn debacle. That’s when genetically modified
corn accidentally mixed with conventional corn and got into dozens of
foods. Kapuscinski says it was common knowledge in the industry that
the corn could get mixed up because of the way it’s transported and
stored… which might have been avoided with uniform safety standards
and government oversight. But until now, industry has resisted that.
They’ve been touting the benefits rather than the risks such as this
ad campaign put out by a group called the Biotechnology Industry
Organization.
(music under)
“Biotechnology, a big word that means hope.”
But one expert says if the industry wants to inspire public
confidence, it should support the Safety First initiative. John
Howard is the founder of a Texas based biotech firm called
ProdiGene. Not all biotech companies support the University of
Minnesota effort, but Howard thinks it has a good chance of
alleviating public concerns.
“The problem is, however, if you do it yourselves, what
credibility do you have as a company promoting your own safety
assessment? So an independent agency or source that comes out
and says, ‘Look, this is now credible, we’ve looked at all the safety
issues,’ that’s great, and if they find something that we’ve missed
then fine, we want to do it that way.”
John Howard says his company is working to bio-engineer corn to
deliver drugs. For instance, if you need insulin you could have it
in your breakfast cereal.
Opponents of bio tech say we don’t know all of the ramifications of
engineering drugs into food or altering the genetics of any organism,
but John Howard thinks we know enough to be safe.
“You can always argue that we just don’t know
enough yet and that’s an argument that can go on and on. And this
applies to everything that we think about in terms of risk. But
what you can do is look at a risk benefit equation. There’s
no question this is a for-profit company, let’s not make any mistake,
but not at the expense of harming people.”
And supporters say the Safety First initiative will see to that.
Lawrence Jacobs is a political scientist at the University of
Minnesota and a leader in Safety First. Jacobs says, like it or not,
GM food is here to stay.
“If we do not find some credible way to address the biosafety issues in
biotechnology, we are heading for a major maelstrom. The challenge
that’s out there now for the biotechnology industry right now is get
your act together. And the potential for consumers to panic in this
country is significant.”
Of course safety standards are already engineered into the
manufacturing of airplanes and cars. But will that work in an
industry which is manufacturing a living thing?
Supporters of the Safety First initiative say there’s too little
oversight on an industry that could have much greater impact on health
and the environment.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mary Stucky.
We hear all the time about invasive species in the Great Lakes region. But many people have no idea what Eurasian Ruffe, Round Goby, or European Frogbit look like and even less of an idea about what to do about the problem. But environmental education groups are trying to change that. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamar Charney reports:
Transcript
We hear all the time about invasive species in the Great Lakes region. But many people have no
idea what Eurasian ruffe, Round Goby, or European frogbit look like and even less of an idea
about what to do about the problem. But environmental education groups are trying to change
that. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamar Charney reports:
Doug Jensen runs the Aquatic Invasive Species Information Center for the University of
Minnesota Sea Grant Program. He’s created a series of nine cards to help people identify exotic
species that are causing problems in the lakes.
“The front cover of the card is high quality photo of the aquatic plant, fish or invertebrate species
and it folds open and the inside of card has text which describes what the problem is how the
species is spreading and what people can do to take action and prevent the spread.”
Jenson hopes people will keep the ID cards in their tackle boxes, glove compartments, and aboard
their boats. Over 3.2 million of them have been printed including a French language version for
Quebec. They’ll be distributed through bait shops, marinas, environmental education
organizations, and resource management offices throughout the Great Lakes
region.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Tamar Charney.
The state legislature in Minnesota is looking at a bill that would restrict phosphorus levels in automatic-dishwashing detergents. Supporters say it would reduce harmful algae blooms in lakes and streams. If the bill passes, it would be the first state to make such restrictions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:
Transcript
The state legislature in Minnesota is looking at a bill that would restrict phosphorus levels in
automatic-dishwashing detergents. Supporters say it would reduce harmful algae blooms in lakes
and streams. If the bill passes, it would be the first state to make such restrictions. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:
Phosphorus in detergents helps to clean dishes, but when the mineral ends up in lakes and
streams, it promotes algae blooms. Large algae blooms can kill fish and restrict sunlight to
bottom-rooting plants. In the 1970s, phosphorus was restricted in other types of detergents.
David Mulla is a professor in the soil, water, and climate department at the University of
Minnesota. He says that legislation did make a difference.
“We had a very large reduction in the amount of phosphorus that was being emitted to our waste
water treatment plants as a result.”
However, Mulla says dishwashing detergents are not one of the primary sources of phosphorus in
lakes and streams today. Detergent manufacturers say if they don’t use phosphorus, their
detergents might not meet some health standards. They also say a reduction won’t have any
environmental benefits. The bill is currently being discussed in the state legislature.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Christina Shockley.
The Earth Liberation Front claimed responsibility for burning this house under construction near Bloomington, Indiana in 1999. Photo courtesy Herald-Times, by Jeremy Hogan.
The Earth Liberation Front is an underground group that attacks institutions it believes harm the environment. During the past five years, its members have caused approximately $40 million in damages. E.L.F’s most notorious acts of destruction include torching a luxury ski resort, destroying the executive offices of a forest-product company, and setting on fire university labs involved in genetically-modified crop research. For some time, environmentalists and others have debated whether this sort of activity was simply a public protest, or acts of terrorism. But since September 11th, that debate has escalated with increased efforts to label those involved in such attacks as terrorists. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Todd Melby has this report:
Transcript
The Earth Liberation Front is an underground group that attacks institutions it
believes harm the environment. During the past five years, its members have caused
approximately $40 million in damages. E.L.F.’s most notorious acts of destruction include torching a luxury ski resort, destroying the executive offices of a forest-product
company, and setting on fire university labs involved in genetically-modified crop research. For some time, environmentalists and others have debated whether this sort of activity was simply a public protest, or acts of terrorism. But since September 11th, that debate has escalated with increased efforts to label those involved in such attacks as terrorists. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Todd Melby has this report:
On a cold, January night in St. Paul, Minnesota, one or more members of the Earth Liberation Front set fire to a construction trailer parked on the University of Minnesota campus. Flames quickly spread to an adjacent building, causing $40,000 in damages.
(Construction site sounds)
But while the Crop Research Building burst into flames, the real target was the university’s proposed Microbial and Genomics building – a $20 million undertaking.
(Construction sounds go silent)
The attack wasn’t a surprise to Peggy Leppick. She’s a state representative, who chairs the Higher Education Committee in the Minnesota House of Representatives.
“A lot of the research that goes on at the university is fairly obscure and people don’t know about it, but when you build a building that is essentially a monument to genomics and genetic engineering, it becomes a bulls-eye.”
That’s why university officials are asking the Legislature for nearly $4 million to beef up security. They’ve also ratcheted up the rhetoric. University of Minnesota president Mark Yudolf has no qualms about using the word “terrorist” to describe E.L.F. members who’ve attacked his campus more than once.
“People who blow up facilities and buildings and who may try to avoid risking human life, but almost inevitably something can go wrong: that is my definition of a terrorist, yes.”
But attaching labels to actions doesn’t come so easily for others. There’s a fine distinction for some between terrorist and protesters.
“The definition of terrorist is a very political definition.”
Katherine Sikkink is a political science professor at the University of Minnesota.
“In this country, we have words for it. It’s called ‘crime.’ We don’t have to jump to the term ‘terrorism.’ When people destroy property it’s called ‘crime.’ We have police forces that are here to deal with crime and I think they should do it.”
Not surprisingly, Leslie James Pickering, a spokesman with the E.L.F. press office in Portland, Oregon, agrees with Sikkink’s characterization.
“If they were terrorists they would be engaging in violent terrorist actions. What they do is sabotage property. They’ve never harmed anybody. They never will harm anybody because it is against their code.”
That code, Pickering says, ensures that human life will be protected. When E.L.F. activists set fire to a building, they say it’s searched before flames engulf the facility.
“They are vandals. They are arsonists. They are engaging in illegal activity, there’s no question about that, but there is a difference between sabotage and terrorism.”
But that distinction may be lost in the rush to deal with terrorism, both foreign and domestic. The government appears on the verge of adding environmental groups such as E.L.F to its “War on Terrorism.”
A top F.B.I. official has called E.L.F. “the most active eco-terrorist” group in the United States. A Congressional Committee recently subpoenaed Leslie James Pickering’s predecessor in the E.L.F press office to testify. When committee members weren’t satisfied with his answers, they threatened him with contempt of Congress.
And now U.S. Congressman Gil Gutknecht, a Minnesota Republican, is calling for the death penalty if politically-motivated arsons or other actions result in a fatality. Gutknecht also wants the federal government to establish an “eco-terrorism” clearinghouse so law enforcement officials can do a better job of tracking environmental activists involved in illegal activity.
These proposals have drawn the ire of Chuck Samuelson, the executive director of the Minnesota Civil Liberties Union.
“September 11 has been a boon for people who are interested in making laws more strict, regulating society and limiting freedom.”
Samuelson says Gutknecht’s death penalty proposal won’t stop politically-motivated murders. And he’s also opposed to a federal clearinghouse that tracks E.L.F. members, saying it’s likely to be secret.
“The question that always comes up is about the privacy rights of people, how that information gets put in, who gets to change that information and who gets to use that information. If it’s secret and is not available to the public, so that you as a reporter couldn’t go see it or do an investigative piece on how they’re doing it, it’s got to scare you.”
Although Samuelson is quick to criticize the government’s proposed crackdown on E.L.F., he’s no defender of the group. He scoffs at the E.L.F. code, saying no matter their ‘no-harm-to-human-life’ intent, it’s only a matter of time before someone is killed.
Professor Sikkink also questions the group’s tactics. While some protest movements have historically engaged in property damage to score political points, she says it comes with a high price tag.
“So these tactics, you know, of destruction of government property are not unheard of, they’ve been around for a long time, but I do think they really run the risk of alienating the people you want to convince.”
Despite the increased pressure on E.L.F to halt the violence, Leslie James Pickering, the group’s spokesman, says he doesn’t expect its members to change its ways anytime soon. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Todd Melby in Minneapolis.
Increasing numbers of American farmers are going "back to the
future" – moving away from the high-investment, high-energy farming
methods of the last fifty years, and experimenting with modern versions
of more traditional techniques. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Stephanie Hemphill reports:
A study to be published this month shows mercury, deposited in riversas long as forty years ago, is still getting into the food chain andcausing environmental and human health problems. The Great Lakes RadioConsortium’s Stephanie Hemphill explains:
President Clinton has said this summer’s record breaking heat is evidence of global warming, and he blasted congress for ignoring the problem. Most scientists are firmly convinced that global warming is already underway, but there is still some scientific uncertainty about what effects it might have. Around the world, scientists are looking for answers. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports on one research project now underway:
