Tag: washington

Bringing a Fish Back From the Brink

  • The American Shad became so rare that hatcheries had to help restore depleted populations (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)

A million year old cycle of fish migration almost came to an end in the waters off of the nation’s capital. But a monumental conservation effort has brought them back from the brink. Sabri Ben-Achour explains:

Transcript

A million year old cycle of fish migration almost came to an end in the waters off of the nation’s
capital. But a monumental conservation effort has brought them back from the brink. Sabri Ben-
Achour explains:

I bet you can’t recognize this sound.

It is the sound of a female shad – it’s a type of fish – having its eggs squeezed out into a metal
bowl.

“In the bowl, it looks like applesauce.”
That’s biologist Catherine Lim. We are on a boat in the middle of the Potomac, 20 miles south of
Washington DC, harvesting and fertilizing shad eggs. Lim picks up a male shad and gives it a
squeeze.

“Yeah, he sprayed out there.”

She mixes the brew around and adds water.

“We’ll bag them up and send them to the fish hatchery.”

This is all part of an effort to restore the population of the American Shad. For millions of years,
the large silver-iridescent fish have swum in from the Atlantic and up the rivers of the East Coast
every spring to spawn. They return to the same place where their lives began, guided by a
unique geological odor that seeps from the earth and mountains that feed each river.

Once upon a time – only a century ago – these fish were so numerous they turned the water silver
and made rivers move.

At least that’s what Jim Cummins says, he’s a biologist.

“On the Susquehanna, there were so many of them they created a wave as they came up the
river, a standing wave.”

On the Potomac they fueled entire industries. According to newspaper reports, Washington DC
exported 4 million barrels of salted shad every year in the 1840’s.

“The wagons would come into Georgetown were so heavy that they crammed up the city – I think
it’s the first report of gridlock in Washington.”

The fish fed more than just commerce – they nourish everything from crabs to dolphins. Bald
Eagles actually evolved to time their egg laying early, so their chicks would hatch just as the Shad
and their relatives appeared in the river. And then came overfishing, dams, and pollution.

“In the 1960’s, there were times when the migratory fish came up to spawn in the area and met
that pollution, and hundreds of thousands of them died and made a stinking mess.”

The clean water act was passed in 1972, but by 1980, the fish were almost wiped out. A
moratorium on fishing at the time was too little too late. Water quality gradually improved as
waste water treatment plants were upgraded and aquatic grasses returned. But still, no Shad.

So Cummins began the Shad restoration project.

They had to use several nets – each hundreds of feet long – just to catch one fish. They got help
from fisheries and even elementary schools. Dams were fixed to let fish go around them. The
Shad population exploded.

At a boat house just outside of DC, anglers Steve Bocat and Louis Covax are enjoying success
that up until recently, few alive have seen here.

“It was great we had incredible fishing. I mean, between the two of us, we had, what, 50-60 fish
up to the boat?”

Another sign of success, a pair of Bald Eagles recently returned to the area following the fish –
the first in decades.

For The Environment Report, I’m Sabri Ben-Achour.

Related Links

Algae Fuel Aspirations

  • A net drags floating algae toward the boat (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)

Algae is attracting a lot of
attention and investment as an alternative
energy source. It grows quickly, contains
a lot of oil, and doesn’t take up valuable
farmland. Ann Dornfeld profiles one company
that’s trying to turn algae into fuel:

Transcript

Algae is attracting a lot of
attention and investment as an alternative
energy source. It grows quickly, contains
a lot of oil, and doesn’t take up valuable
farmland. Ann Dornfeld profiles one company
that’s trying to turn algae into fuel:

I’m standing on a pontoon boat floating just a few feet off the shore of a saltwater bay.
Two men are standing in the waist-deep water around the boat. They’re guiding a layer of
floating algae into a funnel that’s sucking the algae into a burlap bag.

(sucking sound)

It’s an algae harvest – and James Stevens is directing the process. He says they
have to be careful not to suck up young salmon or other animals along with the
algae.

“This junction can be turned on, and it allows me to feed water into a box where
then I can sort and make sure there’s no by-catch actually coming through the
system.”

Stevens is Vice President and Chief Scientist of Blue Marble Energy. It’s
a Seattle start-up trying to turn algae into fuel. Most algae-to-energy researchers
are growing algae in giant tanks. Blue Marble has a different plan: gather algae
that’s already growing in noxious blooms along coastlines.

(sound of waves)

Here in Dumas Bay, not far from Seattle, huge blooms of algae often rot in the
water. That process uses up oxygen and kills marine life. And when the dead algae
washes up on the beach, it creates a smell the neighbors hate.

Blue Marble President Kelly Ogilvie says these algae blooms are common
around Puget Sound – but that’s nothing compared to more polluted waterways
elsewhere in the world.

“And the most recent, I think, salient example was Qingdao, China. And the
bloom that occurred there was, I think, like 800 square miles and they pulled a
million tons out of the water and that is prologue to what is going to be happening
on coastlines across the planet.”

Warmer water can help algae grow, and some scientists think global warming is
contributing to an increase in gigantic blooms. Nutrients from sewage dumping
and fertilizer runoff from farm fields and lawns also help algae flourish.

“If you think about what is actually happening in our oceans, the algae bloom
crisis has just begun. And if we can find a way to turn that new crisis into a
solution to something else, by goodness we’re going to try and make a go at it.”

Most companies doing algae-to-energy research focus on creating biofuels for cars
or jets. Instead of liquid fuel, Blue Marble wants to convert algae into natural gas
and biochemicals.

Along with private investment, Blue Marble has a contract with the Washington
Department of Ecology to collect algae at two bays in Puget Sound.

The department’s Alice Kelly is watching today’s harvest from the beach. She says
her agency hopes this gets rid of the rotten egg smell neighbors have been
complaining about without hurting the ecosystem, the sealife near the shore.

“It’s very important to protect that habitat. So we’re walking a very fine line here
between trying to deal with the excess odor problem and protect the near shore.”

Blue Marble’s approach provides that protection, she says, because its operation is
based just offshore. They aren’t dragging equipment across the beach. And today,
it looks like the only by-catch has been other species of algae.

But some conservationists have big concerns about harvesting wild algae for fuel.

One of them is Kevin Britton-Simmons, a researcher at
the University of Washington. He says a lot of unnatural algae blooms could be
prevented by keeping fertilizer and other pollutants out of the water.

“I feel this is essentially exploiting the problem instead
of fixing it. I’m concerned if we allow a business to develop that’s dependant on
this problem, what’s gonna happen when we fix the problem? Will there then be
pressure for this business to harvest natural populations of algae?”

Natural blooms are a valuable part of the food web, and he says removing them
could rob marine life of a major food source. He says it’s also hard to distinguish
between natural algae blooms and those caused by pollution.

(sound of waves)

Back on Dumas Bay, Kelly Ogilvie says his company has netted nearly 10,000 pounds of algae from the two harvests it’s completed. The next step is to
use bacteria to break down the algae into natural gas and various chemicals.

If all goes as planned, Ogilvie says Blue Marble’s first batch of natural gas will be
ready any day now.

For The Environment Report, I’m Ann Dornfeld.

Related Links

Soil Exhibit Not Treated Like Dirt

  • The 'Secrets of Soil' exhibit at the Smithsonian (Photo credit: Smithsonian Institution, John Steiner and Joseph Talman)

Soil gets treated like dirt sometimes.
But soil is being displayed as a valuable
resource at the Smithsonian in Washington D.C.
Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

Soil gets treated like dirt sometimes.
But soil is being displayed as a valuable
resource at the Smithsonian in Washington D.C.
Chuck Quirmbach reports:

The Secrets of Soil exhibition includes samples from every US state and territory. It highlights
threats to soil.

The Soil Science Society of America is a main sponsor. Ellen Bergfeld is the CEO of the
Society.

She says major floods this year show erosion is still a big problem. Bergfeld also says some
farmers are plowing under land that was once put aside for conservation. Higher crop prices
have lowered enrollment in a government program called Conservation Reserve.

“And a lot of the contracts are coming up over the next few years so we’re going to see just a
tremendous number of acres coming out. And that does not bode well for the use of those soils.”

The soil exhibit will be at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History for about two
years, then travel around the US.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Landscaping to Slow Runoff

  • The bioswales are planted with species that are hardy and beautiful, like this snowberry. (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)

Some cities are looking at taking away parking
on residential streets and replacing it with shallow
ditches full of native plants that filter stormwater.
It’s a way to reduce the polluted runoff that flows
into lakes, rivers and the ocean. As Ann Dornfeld
reports, not everyone is thrilled with the idea:

Transcript

Some cities are looking at taking away parking
on residential streets and replacing it with shallow
ditches full of native plants that filter stormwater.
It’s a way to reduce the polluted runoff that flows
into lakes, rivers and the ocean. As Ann Dornfeld
reports, not everyone is thrilled with the idea:

We’re walking down a winding lane lined with maple trees, tall, dry grasses and
evergreens. Bright white snowberries dot the dark branches. It feels like a walk
in the country. But we’re actually admiring a big-city sewer system.

This little valley – a sort of shallow ditch – is called a “bioswale.” Its plants filter
out pollutants that run off the street. And special, thirsty soil helps the water
absorb into the earth. Sections of the street are narrowed to make room for the
bioswales, so some parking along the street is lost. But houses without
driveways get two parking spaces between the swales.

The bioswales have thick layers of native grasses, shrubs and other plants. It’s
kind of a wild, natural look. Debbie Anderson lives on a nearby street. As she
walks by the bioswale she says to her it just looks messy.

“We think it looked nice when it was first built, but it hasn’t continued to
look good, I don’t think. We moved out here because there was no
sidewalks and the streets were wide open and we like that. Lots of parking,
we can have lots of company. This way you can have, what, two people
that can come? That’s it! No. I don’t want it.”

That’s a pretty familiar argument to Bob Spencer. He’s with the City of Seattle’s
Public Utilities office.

“The big thing is the lack of parking. People really get into using these
street right-of-way shoulders as their personal parking spots.”

But not everybody thinks parking spots are more important than doing something
to reduce water pollution. Spencer says the neighbors on this street actually
competed with other blocks to get these bioswales. It’s free landscaping – and
the city even worked with each homeowner to choose plants that would blend
with their existing garden.

Spencer says the city’s traditional method of dealing with stormwater has washed
contaminants into a nearby creek.

“Well, in the surrounding streets around here, we have what’s called ‘gutter
and ditch’ drainage. And what happens is the water runs off the property
and the impervious streets and rooftops. And it enters a ditch and then
goes pell-mell screaming down to our local salmon-bearing creek, Piper’s
Creek.”

It’s not just Seattle’s creeks that are flooded with runoff. Untreated rainwater
flows straight into lakes and the ocean, polluting them. Cities across the country
are looking for ways to deal with toxic runoff like that.

Spencer says Seattle is pioneering
large-scale natural drainage. In other words, the rain is allowed to drain like it
does in the wilderness. The plant roots slow the water so it can absorb into the
earth. That helps prevent flooding. Pollutants like heavy metals, pesticides
and fertilizers are trapped in the soil, and some of them are broken down in these bioswales.

“So we’ve got a little bit more like a forested system in that we have a duff
layer that acts as a sponge.”

Spencer says the city hasn’t tested the water quality of the runoff that eventually
enters the creek. But he says the runoff has been slowed to a trickle.

“It infiltrates and holds and keeps here 99% of that runoff. So that’s a
pretty large flush of water that’s not entering the creek with this system.”

Officials in Seattle’s city government like the green look of the bioswales. And
they help the city meet federal pollution guidelines. City Council President
Richard Conlin says over the course of three bioswale projects, the city has been
able to lower the cost to about the same as conventional stormwater treatment.

Seattle’s newest bioswale system will be at the foot of Capitol Hill. That’s where
seemingly half of the city’s young people live, in blocks full of apartments,
nightclubs and parking lots.

“It’s actually the densest urban neighborhood west of Minneapolis and
north of San Francisco. So it has a lot of impervious surface.”

Stormwater from Capitol Hill rushes off the hard surfaces and down to a lake. So
the city is taking advantage of new development at the bottom of the hill. It’s
planning to filter the runoff through bioswales before it pollutes the lake.

“And once we’ve done that, I think we’re pretty much ready to say this is
the standard from now on.”

Conlin says the city will likely install bioswales in all new developments, and on
streets where the most runoff enters waterways.

He says cities around the country are contacting Seattle to find out how to install
bioswales of their own.

For the Environment Report, I’m Ann Dornfeld.

Related Links

Cities Brace for Global Warming – Part 1

When we think about climate change, many of us think about it as a national, even international, problem. But a growing number of officials at the local level are beginning to see it as a local problem as well. Karen Kelly brings us the first
of a two-part series on what cities are doing to
prepare for global warming:

Transcript

When we think about climate change, many of us think about it as a national, even international, problem. But a growing number of officials at the local level are beginning to see it as a local problem as well. Karen Kelly brings us the first
Of a two-part series on what cities are doing to
prepare for global warming:


Ron Sims has lived in Washington State his whole life, and he loves its unique environment: Puget Sound, the snow-capped mountains, and the salmon runs. But he’s worried about its future. He’s now the head of King County, Washington. It’s home to about 2 million residents, including the city of Seattle.


As county executive, he sees the scientific reports about his region.
They say the snow caps are melting, marine life is changing and the cedar trees are being replaced by other species. That’s what happening right now.


But what really convinced Sims he had to do something is when he called scientists at the nearby University of Washington’s School of Climate Impacts.


“And I asked them a simple question. I wanted to know what the climate in our area would be in 2050.”


The scientists’ report said King County could expect frequent torrential rains that would cause serious flooding, even swamping the buildings of some major employers. In terms of wildlife, the rains would wipe out the salmon’s spawning grounds. Yet, at other times of the year, they say they’ll be a drought as the snowcaps decline. Sims knew it was time to take action:


“Should we wait for our children to make this decision in 2045 or 2030? And since we now know that we have to make these decisions, based upon what the scientists are telling us, why aren’t we doing it now? Because generations in the future are going to have to make far more complex decisions and this shouldn’t be one of them they have to work from.


Sims isn’t the only city or county leader who’s taking climate change seriously.
The mayor of London, England starting charging people a fee for driving into his city during rush hour.


In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg made the same proposal to reduce emissions. He also wants to see a new rule that requires all New York City taxis to be hybrids within the next five years, and groups like the US Conference of Mayors are holding climate change summits to help local officials plan for the effects of global warming.


Jennifer Penney is with the Alliance for Resilient Cities, which recently brought local leaders to Toronto. She says a lot of officials are realizing that they’ll be on the front lines when serious weather events occur:


“Most of those things are in the jurisdiction of the local government. So protecting people from heat waves. Dealing with local floods. Dealing with wind storms or tornadoes that come through. Those are the kinds of things that local governments are on the ground, they have to deal with.”


And that’s why city and county officials across the nation are starting to make plans.


Back in Washington State, Ron Sims decided on two strategies to deal with this. One, reduce his county’s carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050, mostly by getting cars off the road. That’s led the county to start buying up development rights on rural lands to prevent sprawl and the number of suburban commuters. They’ve also bought a fleet of hybrid buses.


And the second strategy? Start finding ways to adapt to the realities of climate change. King County has taken many steps. They range from a plan to strengthen their levies to prevent flooding, and the county is buying up forest land to act as a sponge for the runoff water. Sims says King County’s climate change plan has touched every department in the government:


“We decided to go backwards in time in all functions of this government… how we plan for growth, what do preserve, what will we face, what do we see the consequences of 2050 being, and are we prepared for that?”


A lot of people wonder if the public is ready for that, to sacrifice for it.
Ron Sims tells his colleagues in local government that the public is ready.
They saw the pictures of Hurricane Katrina. Many saw Al Gore’s documentary on climate change, and now they’re looking for elected officials, if not at the national level, then at the local level, to take the lead.


For the Environment Report, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

Part 1: Tidal Power in the Pacific

  • Research teams are looking for turbines that make tidal power work without harming sea life, like this one. (Photo courtesy of Charles Cooper with Oceana Energy)

For decades, people in the Pacific Northwest have relied on hydropower
for most of their electricity. But dams hurt salmon runs and river
ecosystems. That’s sent Washington utilities on a quest for new, cleaner
sources of power. As Ann Dornfeld reports, some are looking for new ways
to harness the power of flowing water:

Transcript

For decades, people in the Pacific Northwest have relied on hydropower
for most of their electricity. But dams hurt salmon runs and river
ecosystems. That’s sent Washington utilities on a quest for new, cleaner
sources of power. As Ann Dornfeld reports, some are looking for new ways
to harness the power of flowing water:


It’s a brilliant day outside. Craig Collar is perched on a rocky outcropping
overlooking rushing green water swirling and eddying below. Collar says
the water is moving so quickly because this is one of only two spots where
the Pacific Ocean flows into Puget Sound:


“As the tide comes in, it comes into this constrained passageway at
Deception Pass. Y’know, all that energy gets channeled, focused
through this very narrow area. So that’s what results in these rapid
tidal currents that we’re seeing right here.”


Collar researches new power sources for Snohomish County Public Utility
District. His goal is to use a sort of underwater windmill to convert some of
this water’s energy to electricity and funnel it onto the power grid. It’s called
“tidal power.”


Collar says there are dozens of underwater turbine designs to choose
from. Some look like a standard wind turbine with three big blades; others
look like a metal donut or a fish tail.


The Utility District is considering putting underwater turbine farms at half a
dozen locations around Puget Sound. It estimates tidal energy could power
at least 60,000 homes. Collar says the technology has a lot going for
it. It doesn’t emit carbon dioxide or other pollutants. He says underwater
turbines can be much smaller than wind turbines because they’re so
efficient:


“And that’s just as a result of the higher density of water. Water’s
roughly 800 times denser than air, so it contains a lot more energy.”


Unlike the wind, tides aren’t really affected by the season. You know the
saying: “predictable as the tides.” Collar says lunar phases let you forecast
the tides for decades into the future:


“Where with wind, you’re doing good if you can forecast hours or
even a little bit ahead. That really helps utilities like us integrate that
power into the power grid.”


Collar acknowledges there are a lot of questions about the impact of tidal
turbines on marine ecology.


These questions worry nearby Native American tribes. The Tulalip
reservation is close to Deception Pass, and they fish throughout Puget
Sound. Darryl Williams is the tribes’ environmental liaison:


“Five species of salmon, orca, grey whales, eagles, hawks, falcons…
y’know, we have numerous species of fish and marine mammals and
migratory birds that use the areas that are being proposed for these
turbines, and the studies really haven’t been done yet to show what
the impacts may or may not be.”


Along with the marine environment, Williams says the tribes are worried
that tidal turbines could scare away fish or get tangled in fishing nets.


“For the tribes, the fisheries aren’t only an economic source but
they’re also part of the tribes’ culture. Most of our cultural activities
are centered around salmon, and if we can’t catch the salmon, then
that part of our culture really goes away.”


A research team at the University of Washington is looking for ways to
make tidal power work without harming sea life. Brian Polagye is a
mechanical engineering graduate student whose focus is renewable
energy. His team is working with the oceanography department to look at
the ecological risks of tidal power. But Polagye says there are a lot of
misconceptions about what those risks are.


“The most obvious one is the question of ‘Oh! So you’re going to put
these rotors in the water and you’re gonna make sushi in addition to
electrical power.’ People view these turbines kind of as almost a
propeller that’s moving through the water so rapidly that if anything
gets near it it’s gonna get chopped to pieces. In practice, you can’t
actually run the rotors that fast. The maximum speed that the tip of
the rotor can turn at is about 25 miles an hour. Which is actually
relatively slow.”


Polagye says one of the biggest risks is that removing some of the energy
from the tidal currents will change the ecology downstream. He’s studying
how much power can be extracted from an estuary before it has a
noticeable effect on the ecosystem.


Back at Deception Pass, Craig Collar with the utility district says even if
there is a small ecological impact, it’s key to look at the overall picture:


“At the end of the day the thing that’s compelling about tidal energy
for us is there just aren’t very many opportunities for clean,
renewable, emission-free energy that’s both predictable and close to
the loads. And all those things are true for tidal energy in the Puget
Sound region, and there simply is no other renewable for which all
those things are true.”


The utility is working with the University of Washington to figure out
whether tidal power is viable in Puget Sound. If so, it could help reinvent
hydropower on the Pacific Coast for the next generation.


For the Environment Report, I’m Ann Dornfeld.

Related Links

Co2 “Upstream” Battle

There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:

Transcript

There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:


Back in March, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing
on how the auto industry could help fight global warming. All the
bigwigs in the U.S. auto industry were there: the heads of Ford,
General Motors and Chrysler, the North American president of Toyota and
the head of the United Auto Workers.


At the hearing, all of them agreed they would support a cap on CO2
emissions from vehicles, but they had a sort of caveat:


“We believe that there’s a lot of merit to it. And we believe if it’s
upstream…”


“For Cap and Trade, I think the further upstream you go, the more
efficient you’re going to be.”


“I’d just echo the upstream part.”


“The upstream as I stated earlier and the rest is absolutely critical.”


That was Ron Gettlefinger of the UAW, Jim Press of Toyota, Alan Mulally
of Ford, and Tom Lasorda of Chrysler.


So what do they mean by “upstream”? Here’s Ford spokesman Mike Moran:


“Lower carbon fuels, so that it’s just not what comes out of the
tailpipe, but you’re moving upstream and including the fuels that would
be included in the equation in the transportation sector.”


Basically the idea is, if you have less carbon in the fuel, you’ll pump
less carbon dioxide into the air.


But car companies really can’t take the carbon out of fuel. That’s
really more of a job for the oil industry. So are auto executives just
passing the buck?


David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says yeah, they’re
dodging the issue:


“The auto companies are basically finding more creative ways to say,
‘No,’ they won’t do anything to improve their products.”


Auto executives would say they’re already working to improve their
products, with millions of ethanol-capable vehicles on the road, and a
growing number of gas-electric hybrids. And many in the auto industry feel that they’ve been singled out for
regulation in the past.


The carmakers main lobbying group, the Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers says that for the past 30 years, the auto industry has
been the only industry subject to carbon dioxide regulations. Though
most people try to avoid saying so in public, there is clearly some
tension between the auto industry and the oil industry.


Louis Burke is with Conoco Phillips. He says his company is willing to
do more to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the oil company just
came out in favor of setting up mandatory federal rules. Those include a
possible system that caps carbon dioxide emissions, and allows
companies to trade carbon credits as if they were commodities:


“You can cap and trade at some point down within the value chain,
whether it’s all the way upstream, or whether it’s pretty far downstream. You
can also apply a carbon tax throughout the whole value chain. The whole
idea is it’s gotta be transparent, it can’t penalize any one group.”


So upstream, downstream, the point is something needs to be done.


David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says everyone can
do a little more:


“Everyone has to do their part. That means car companies have to
produce vehicles to get more miles to the gallon. Oil companies need to
have lower carbon fuels and yes, even consumers need to find ways to
drive less.”


It’s still not clear what exactly what approach Congress will take
toward cutting auto emissions, but while leaders in Washington try to
settle on a plan, local and state officials across the country are
coming up with their own plans.


California and 10 other states have their own plans to regulate
tailpipe emissions. Those plans are being challenged in court by the
auto industry. And California has also gone forward with the nation’s first low carbon
standard for fuels.


That “upstream” plan has the support of both auto and oil companies.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Governments Accountable to Great Lakes?

A commission that advises the US and
Canadian governments on the Great Lakes wants to
see more accountability from Washington and
Ottawa. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

A commission that advises the US and
Canadian governments on the Great Lakes wants to
see more accountability from Washington and
Ottawa. Chuck Quirmbach reports:


The International Joint Commission is focusing its latest report on
getting the US and Canada to set up an accountability plan for
restoring and protecting the Great Lakes.


US Commissioner Allen Olson says one example of accountability is
getting Congress to approve money for an Asian Carp barrier near
Chicago to keep the foreign fish out of the lakes.


“There are a number of members of the United States Congress of both
parties that are immediately accountable to address that issue.”


Canadian Commissioner Jack Blaney says the governments also have to be
accountable to what citizens said at recent IJC hearings:


“They want to swim at their beaches, they want to be able to eat the
fish. They want to be able to take water out of the lakes that they
don’t have to spend enormous sums treating.”


The IJC wants a preliminary plan to be ready by the summer of next
year.


For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach

Related Links

Elections Boost Environmental Agenda

  • The mid-term elections caused a major power shift in Washington. Democrats say they plan to rev up Congress’ power of oversight. (Photo courtesy of Architect of the Capitol)

The political landscape in the U.S. changed overnight last week. The Democratic takeover will mean a big shift in policy-making efforts in Washington. Mark Brush has more on how environmental issues played out in the election, and what this new Congress might do on the environmental front:

Transcript

The political landscape in the U.S. changed overnight last week. The Democratic takeover will mean a big shift in policy-making efforts in Washington. Mark Brush has more on how environmental issues played out in the election, and what this new Congress might do on the environmental front:

Environmentalists say some of their biggest enemies were defeated in the midterm election. And top on their list of the worst environmental offenders was California Congressman Richard Pombo.


(The “Pombo Mambo” plays: a catchy ad jingle whose lyrics expose Richard Pombo’s environmental record, produced and run by the League of Conservation Voters.)


Environmentalists spent millions of dollars on radio and television ads to defeat Pombo, and they say it was money well spent. They came to really despise Pombo because of his work to weaken the Endangered Species Act.


Tiernan Sittenfeld is the legislative director for the League of Conservation Voters. She says many Republican committee chairs, such as Richard Pombo, simply obstructed environmental legislation. She says now that will change.


“It’s not that even that Congress has even voted to pass particular pro-environment legislation; it’s that the house leadership and the committee chairs haven’t even allowed such legislation to come to the floor. They haven’t even wanted a debate on it. So I think having different leadership, having different committee chairs who care about protecting the environment, who care about clean air, clean water, and open space is going to be a whole world of difference.”


So now that the Republican leadership is out who is taking their place? One legislator who is expected to gain a lot of power is Democrat John Dingell of Michigan. He will chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee.


Dingell says he, and other Democratic committee chairs will first use their power to make sure that existing environmental laws are being enforced by the Bush Administration.


“This administration has been totally unsupervised by the Congress, and checks and balances which are so important to the Founding Fathers, and legislative oversight, have simply not taken place since the Bush Administration came in.”


Dingell will be joined by many other legislators who are likely to have strong environmental agendas. People like Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, and Henry Waxman. They have several issues in mind that they feel have been mishandled by the Bush Administration. Top on their list is energy policy and global warming.


On energy, environmental lobbyists say high gas prices have made the issue one that resonates with voters.


Karen Wayland is the legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. She says the new Congress will revisit the tax breaks and other financial incentives given to oil companies in the last energy bill.


“I think what something the House will do at least will be to look at the royalty relief that Congress has given to the oil companies and sort of try to roll back some of the royalty relief; make the oil companies pay full price for extracting oil from our public lands and then use that money to invest in clean energy.”


Democrats are also expected to make a push for national renewable energy standards, and higher fuel economy standards for cars and trucks.


As for global warming, the Democrats say the Bush White House and the Republicans in Congress have completely ignored the issue. The Democrats are expected to introduce several global warming bills in the next session.


But while the Democrats gained a lot of power, they still will have to work around the threat of a presidential veto. And in the Senate, the republicans still hold more than enough seats to block legislation.


Darren Samuelsohn is a senior reporter with Greenwire, a Washington DC based news service covering energy and environmental policy. Samuelsohn says while the Republicans still hold a lot of power, it’s interesting to see how much of it was eroded overnight.


“As you start to talk about it and think about it, it’s across the board: it’s judges, it’s legislation, it’s oversight. And then the thing that really nobody outside of Washington ever really kind of knows what’s going on about, but the whole huge appropriation – the whole federal budget process. That will now be Democrat controlled and we’re talking about hundreds of billions of dollars that get spent every year.”


Samuelsohn says the Democrats will now face the challenge of finding more money for their favorite environmental programs, while at the same time making good on campaign promises to cut the huge federal budget deficit.


For the Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Wind Energy Sweeping Away Wildlife?

  • A single wind turbine can change air currents, creating dangerous winds for birds and other airborne wildlife. (Photo by Michael Tyas)

Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States. For some environmentalists, that’s
good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the air. There’s no nuclear by-product. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird.
The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States.
For some environmentalists, that’s good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the
air. There’s no nuclear byproduct. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you
have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer
has more:


Chandler Robbins has spent a lot of time studying how birds kill themselves. He says he
would go out on windy nights to the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. He’d
stand at the bottom of the 555 foot tall obelisk and watch the birds at the top:


“Just as they get to the tower, they just go around the edge of it and bang, the turbulence
from the winds going around the tower, sweeps those birds against the tower, and they’re
killed.”


Speaking at a conference, Robbins tells the crowd he once watched more than 500 birds
slam into the monument in one night, and that monument is standing still. Now imagine
wind turbines, some of them about as tall as the Washington Monument, with spinning
blades that reach nearly a football field in diameter.


Alex Hoar is with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says a single turbine can now
change air currents for three acres around the turbine itself:


“So, if you put up a hundred turbines, the blades are sweeping 300 acres. So, that’s a large
space. And what we don’t know is when are birds and bats at risk.”


We don’t know because no one has really studied it. Both Alex Hoar and Chandler
Robbins say scientists know a lot about where birds take off and where they land. They
know about migration patterns, but they don’t know about what birds do, or where they
go while they’re in the air.


So, with more wind farms being built across the country, it’s not clear what affect they
might have on bird populations, but some suspect it won’t be good. Peter Kailing works
with an environmental consulting company. He recently did an environmental impact
study for a new 47 hundred acre commercial wind farm in Michigan. He says scientists
can learn a lot from the wind farms that have already been built. He says the ones that
have done the most damage to wildlife have a few things in common:


“The turbine was in a narrow valley, or a mountain-pass, or on the edge of a large
water body with steep wooded cover that was used by migrating songbirds, there’s almost
always a topographical association.”


Weather also plays a role. Peter Kailing and others say that birds tend to avoid cloud
banks by flying under them. That could put them in the path of turbine blades. So, one
way to limit damage would be to shut the turbines down on cloudy days.


Chandler Robbins says better technology could also limit damage. He says turbine blades
could be equipped with sensors:


“If a bird or a bat collided with that blade, it would set up enough vibration so that the
blade could be feathered temporarily to avoid other birds striking until the immediate
problem is over.”


Feathering essentially means that you twist the angle of the blade so that wind passes
over it, rather than pushing the blade into a spin. That way, birds aren’t sucked into it.
It’s basically the turbine’s braking system. Some say you don’t even need a sensor on the
turbine. They say engineers could monitor radar and thermal imaging. That would tell
them if any migrating birds are in the area, and if they are, feather the blades.


Of course, the absolute safest solution in the short term might be just to stop building
wind farms, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks that’s a good idea.
Most seem to realize that any way of making electricity will have some impact on the
environment. The question is what can be done with each of them to minimize the risk.
With wind energy, that work is just getting started.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links