The US Military claims that it is exempt from cleaning up polluted former military sites. Neighbors contest this claim. (Image courtesy of the US Department of Defense)
The military has long gotten breaks on some environmental laws. Chuck
Quirmbach reports Congress might put a limit on those exemptions for the
military:
Transcript
There are thousands of old military sites in need of environmental cleanup. But, work on many has been slow partly because of disputes over the defense department getting waivers from some
environmental laws.
More than 80 community groups are supporting the so-called Military Environmental Responsibility Act. The measure would eliminate the long-term breaks from environmental laws. Laura Olah lives near a former army ammunition plant. She says the bill would force the military to act faster in cleaning up the properties.
“It’s a win-win. I mean, it’s gonna save a lot of tax dollars because it’s
gonna motivate clean ups in a timely manner and that’s when we save money.”
Olah says it saves money because once the land is cleaned up, it can be
reused.
The US military has said the long-term exemptions are needed for national
security.
Memorials to miners and past mining disasters dot the public spaces in rural
parts of southern Illinois. This granite obelisk is in honor of mining near
West Frankfort, which is in the heart of Illinois coal country, and close to
several operating mines. In 1980, Illinois had 18,000 coal miners - now, the
workforce is less than 4,000. Mining experts say new digging permits, new hires
and new investment in Illinois coal signals a comeback, though it's unclear
mining employment will reach former heights. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
John Mead directs the Center for Clean Coal Research at Southern Illinois
University. Mead says the probable comeback of Illinois' coal industry
hasn't fully materialized yet, but he agrees with industry experts who say
cleaner-burning coal-fired power plants are creating a new market for the
state's high-energy resource. By the way, the coal nugget in his palm is the
only coal he could find in his office. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
The exit at an operating mine near Galatia, Illinois. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
This coal fired power plant sits at the corner of the SIU campus in Carbondale,
Illinois. It's built sulfur scrubbers and other technology that allow it to use Illinois coal. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
America has a love-hate relationship
with coal. We burn coal to make half our
electricity, but we’re always fighting coal’s
air pollution. Some regulations decimated
the coal industry in one key state. Shawn
Allee reports miners there are caught
between a slow comeback and another round of
regulation:
Transcript
America has a love-hate relationship
with coal. We burn coal to make half our
electricity, but we’re always fighting coal’s
air pollution. Some regulations decimated
the coal industry in one key state. Shawn
Allee reports miners there are caught
between a slow comeback and another round of
regulation:
Coal was once king of the Southern Illinois economy, but no longer.
Nathan Threewitt lives in the area. He explains mining jobs evaporated.
Nathan Threewitt: “Eighteen years ago, give or take a couple, people went from
making a nice, upper-class living to nothing at all. Couldn’t find work, everybody
had to move.”
Shawn Allee: “Did you have that happen in your own family?”
Threewitt: “Yep. My dad’s got ten brothers and sisters. They went from, everybody
had clothes for school, everybody had food to eat, to, we don’t know how the hell it
was gonna happen.”
Even though Threewitt has a tough history with coal – he’s actually trying to get into the
industry.
In fact, I find him while he’s taking a break from a coal mining training class at Rend
Lake College.
I know at one time, classes like these had been canceled.
I track down instructor David Colombo to see what’s changed.
David Colombo: “This room is where I train miners for the most part.”
Shawn Allee: “What’s this?”
Colombo: “Ugh. This is a high voltage cable.”
Allee: “This is almost as thick as your arm.”
Colombo: “This isn’t the biggest of the bigs, either.”
Right now, only about four thousand Illinois miners need to be familiar with equipment
like this.
But Colombo gets calls from mining companies in the area who need trained workers.
So, his school’s growing to keep up.
Shawn Allee: “Why have faith that you’re going to need space for miners to be
trained?”
David Colombo: “With the mining permitting that’s going on, is the highest it’s been
in thirty years.”
Colombo: “Gentlemen in this afternoon’s class will start sinking a mine within the
next week or two. Right now it just employs ten people, but in a year from now, that
same mine’s probably going to employ a hundred and ten people.”
People use words like rebound and comeback when they describe the Illinois coal
industry.
To understand what happened, you have to dial back a little.
“It was really the effect of Clean Air Act amendments of 1990.”
This is John Mead. He heads coal research at Southern Illinois University.
He says Illinois coal is blessed with high energy, but it’s cursed with sulfur that caused
acid rain and lung disease. The amendments aimed to cut that.
“Most utilities were able to switch to lower-sulfur coal, and that’s just what they
did.”
In fact, utilities opened new mines out West where the coal has less sulfur.
As for an Illinois coal turn-around?
“Today, sulfur and other materials in the coal can be controlled pretty effectively
with technology.”
So, now Illinois coal can better compete with lower-sulpher coal.
But here’s the thing. There could be another pollution clamp-down in the works.
You know about global-warming, right? Well, carbon dioxide’s a big cause, and coal
produces carbon dioxide in spades.
Scientists say cutting coal emissions would be a quick way to cut carbon.
So, miners in Southern Illinois get mixed messages – the country wants their coal again,
but maybe not for long.
Miner-to-be Nathan Threewitt says he’s thought this through.
Nathan Threewitt: “Well, if anybody looked at the economics of it, it’s gonna go
back. Coal used to be fifteen dollars a ton, it’s now 65 dollars a ton. You’re gonna
have these coal companies with coal left in the ground, it used to not be worth it to
get the money out, now it’s worth it.”
Shawn Allee: “You like those odds.”
Threewitt: “Yeah, I do. I’m rolling the dice on it.”
Threewitt figures, he’s got time to build a career from coal, while America makes up its
mind just how clean it wants its coal-fired electricity.
Lake Superior's South Shore, Wisconsin (Photo by Dave Hansen, courtesy of the EPA)
Congress might vote this fall
on a plan to triple the amount of money
for cleaning up pollution hot spots
around the Great Lakes. Chuck Quirmbach
reports:
Transcript
Congress might vote this fall
on a plan to triple the amount of money
for cleaning up pollution hot spots
around the Great Lakes. Chuck Quirmbach
reports:
The Great Lakes Legacy Act is supposed to remove contaminated sediment from harbors.
But, clean-up has been slow because there’s not enough money.
Although tens of millions of dollars have been authorized in the past, Congress and the
Bush Administration have not actually spent much of it on clean up projects.
EPA regional administrator Lynn Buhl says despite the history of the Legacy Act, more
money should be authorized.
“First of all, there needs to be an appreciation of how many players are involved in these
projects. They don’t come together overnight. I think we’ve done well to have completed
five already.”
Congress could increase the amount of authorized spending from 54 million dollars a
year to 150 million per year.
The EPA acknowledges a potential tripling of the funds for the Great Lakes Legacy Act
might not sit well with some Congressional budget hawks.
Environmentalists warn the Endangered Species Act is in danger during the last months of the Bush Administration (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
The Bush administration is making a proposal that environmentalists
say will weaken the Endangered Species Act. The proposal would eliminate a
requirement for independent review of big federal projects such as highways,
bridges or dams. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The Bush administration is making a proposal that environmentalists
say will weaken the Endangered Species Act. The proposal would eliminate a
requirement for independent review of big federal projects such as highways,
bridges or dams. Lester Graham reports:
Right now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service
reviews anything like that that could harm endangered species.
The Secretary of the Interior says the existing regulations create unnecessary conflicts
between agencies and delays on important projects.
The new proposal would let the agency in charge of construction decide for itself if the
project would affect an endangered species.
Bob Irvin is with the environmental group, the Defenders of Wildlife. He says this
proposal eliminates safeguards.
“Previously the Fish and Wildlife Service had a role in reviewing the impacts of those
actions. So, literally, what the administration is proposing is to put the fox in charge of
the chicken coop.”
That’s not the way the Department of Interior sees it.
Kaush Arha is a Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Department of Interior. He took
issue with the fox in charge of the chicken coop metaphor.
“I think that’s an exaggerated statement. And it is unfounded hyperbole. What you are
referring to as “fox” in that particular issue are very, very well qualified, very well
respected and dedicated natural resource management agencies like the U.S. Forest
Service, like Bureau of Land Management, Army Corps of Engineers and others.”
But, no matter how dedicated those wildlife officials are, the Bush administration has a
reputation of putting political pressure on scientists in several agencies, and science
has been changed or rigged in favor of industry.
But the Interior Department says the agencies operate within a political environment.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Arha says, besides, the agencies already make decisions
about federal projects and the Endangered Species Act this way. The proposed
changes would just make current practices clearer for the agencies without completely
overhauling the procedures.
“This captures the existing practices, clarifies and gives more direction and it is narrowly
tailored to do so.”
Environmentalists such as Bob Irvin see something much more sinister than the
administration making things clearer for the different agencies affected by the
Endangered Species Act.
“With barely five months left in the administration, they’re trying to ram through a
proposal to weaken the Endangered Species Act. This is completely in keeping with the
anti-environmental record of this administration. But it is also completely outrageous.”
Environmental groups likely will end up taking the issue to court. The Bush
Environmental Protection Agency tried a similar attempt to by-pass independent
review. The federal courts struck that effort down.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
When "opportunities for wilderness" knock, will Congress answer? (Photo by Jake Levin)
The Bush Administration is recommending wilderness protection for a group of 21 islands in Lake Superior. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports:
Transcript
The Bush Administration is recommending wilderness protection for a group of 21 islands
in Lake Superior. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports from
Superior.
This is the first time Assistant Interior Secretary Craig Manson visited the Apostle Islands
National Lakeshore off the coast of Wisconsin. If Congress goes along with the
Administration’s recommendation, his next visit won’t see much change because much
of the park is already operating as a wilderness area. Manson says critics are wrong
when they say the Bush Administration isn’t protecting wilderness.
“Ultimately, it is up to the Congress to designate wilderness. There are a number of
wilderness proposals pending before the Congress that have been in limbo for a number
of years and Congress has failed to act on them.”
The proposal would keep 80% of the islands a wilderness area… with motorboat access
to the islands, but no motor vehicles allowed on the 21-island group. That’s not enough,
according to Sean Wherley. He’s with the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness.
He says it’s political grandstanding for a battleground state.
“The fact that now it’s lining up behind a non-controversial piece on the Apostles is
disingenuous and misleading at best. It’s very troubling because they have passed on
opportunities for wilderness across the country.”
So far this Congress hasn’t passed any wilderness designations. If that holds true, it will be
only the second Congress not to do that since the passage of the Wilderness Act in 1964.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mike Simonson.
Congress has approved a plan to clean up some of the most polluted spots in the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Congress has approved a plan to clean up some of the
most polluted spots in the Great Lakes. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
The Great Lakes Legacy Act authorizes 270-million dollars over the next
five years to clean up pollution hot spots known as Areas of Concern.
Matt Doss is with the Great Lakes Commission, which lobbies
Congress on behalf of the eight Great Lakes states. He says Congress still
has to approve appropriations for the Act.
“It’s an important victory, but we need to get the money to
implement the bill. And, secondly, I think people need to
recognize that this is a very important down payment on
getting this work done.”
The actual cost of the clean up of the areas will be much higher.
Doss says if this money shows measurable results, it will be easier to ask Congress for more in the future. Although 270-million sounds like a lot, other areas have pulled in a lot more. For instance, the Florida Everglades
recently pulled in nearly eight billion dollars for clean up projects there.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
While the U.S. continues to struggle over the use of pesticides, its neighbor to the north has recently taken some major steps toward restricting its use. Earlier this year Canada’s largest grocery chain announced that its 440 garden centers would be pesticide-free by 2003. In the wake of this announcement the Canadian government introduced amendments to its 33 year-old pesticide control act. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that while this is welcome news… “what took so long?”:
Transcript
While the U.S. continues to struggle over the use of pesticides, its neighbor to the north has recently taken some major steps toward restricting its use. Earlier this year, Canada’s largest grocery chain announced that its 440 garden centers would be pesticide-free by 2003. In the wake of this announcement, the Canadian government introduced amendments to its 33 year-old pesticide control act. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that while this is welcome news, “What took so long?”
Contrary to popular belief, there are at least three things that you can’t avoid – death, taxes and pesticides. Pesticides are everywhere – in our food, in our water and in the air that we breathe.
Ever since the publication of Rachel Carson’s book, Silent Spring, 40 years ago, many environmentalists have expressed their concern that anything that can kill other living organisms must also have an effect on human health. They have patiently gathered evidence while encouraging the scientific community to do the same. But despite our growing awareness of the dangers of pesticides, progress toward restricting their use has been painstakingly slow.
And then came Hudson. A decade ago this small Quebec town passed a local by-law to restrict the cosmetic use of pesticides. Cosmetic use generally means using them to improve the appearance of lawns and gardens. Two lawn care companies immediately took the town to court. The ensuing legal battle dragged on for ten years. But the town’s remarkable tenacity paid off. Last year the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously upheld Hudson’s right to legislate the use of pesticides and encouraged other municipalities to do the same.
The Supreme Court decision literally opened a floodgate of activity. Hundreds of municipalities that had been waiting for the Hudson ruling are now proceeding with their own pesticide legislation.
Even the traditionally conservative Canadian Cancer Society – known for its “cancer can be beaten” philosophy is calling for a ban on the cosmetic use of pesticides known to cause cancer. Apparently, cancer not only can be beaten – it can be prevented.
Then in March a modern day corporate miracle happened. The Loblaw’s grocery chain announced that it would be pesticide free in all of its 440 garden centers by next year. What was so amazing about the giant retailer’s announcement is that a cancer victim inspired it. After being diagnosed with breast cancer in 1997, a young Canadian doctor went on a one-woman campaign to ban pesticide use. Dr. Bruinsma’s story caught the attention of a Loblaw’s company official and the rest is corporate history.
It was only after all of this, that the Canadian government finally introduced a long promised update of its 33 year-old pesticide act. While the bill isn’t perfect, it is a step in the right direction – the direction that environmentalists have been pointing to for decades.
The Canadian Cancer Society, Loblaws, even the Canadian government are making some dramatic shifts in direction thanks to the extraordinary efforts of ordinary citizens – many of them cancer patients, like Dr. Bruinsma. While struggling with their own disease they have gathered evidence about the harmful effects of pesticides in the hopes of preventing others from suffering the same fate.
Sadly, Dr. Bruinsma didn’t live to see the change in Loblaw’s corporate policy. She died of breast cancer just a few short weeks before the announcement was made. Ironically, Rachel Carson, the great-grandmother of the anti-pesticide movement also lost her life to breast cancer a few years after Silent Spring was published in 1962. What we can learn from their deaths – and their remarkable lives – is that change, as always, starts with the power of one.
To get more states to comply with the federal Clean Water Act, environmental activists are taking them to court. Ohio is the latest example. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Cohen has more:
Transcript
To get more states complying with the federal clean water act….environmental activists are taking them to court. Ohio’s the latest example. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Cohen reports:
Mercury from power plants, run-off from farm fields, and poisons from manufacturers – they’re all in Ohio rivers and streams. In fact, nearly 900 are officially called “impaired.”
The state EPA has asked legislators for extra cash to prepare clean-up plans….but the money has never come through. So now, activists like Jack Shaner of the Ohio Environmental Council have filed a court suit. It demands the feds force Ohio to act.
“The Ohio EPA has told the feds it will take 25 years just to come up with the cleanup plans and that doesn’t include the cleanup itself.”
A key senator says Ohio’s made what he calls great strides. Jim Carnes cites the revival of Lake Erie. He’d like the clean-up to move faster but he notes Ohio has a budget crisis – “there’s not an unlimited supply of money.”
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill Cohen in Columbus.
People often associate Canada with wildlife. Beavers, moose and grizzly
bears are among the better-known residents. So it may come as a
surprise that endangered species are not federally protected. The
Canadian government is hoping to change that with a new bill called the
Species at Risk Act. But environmentalists say the plan is too weak.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Businesses and environmental groups are closely watching a case now
before a U-S appeals court. The case could mean major changes in how
environmental laws are enforced. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Lester Graham reports:
The US Military claims that it is exempt from cleaning up polluted former military sites. Neighbors contest this claim. (Image courtesy of the US Department of Defense)
