In mountaintop removal mining, explosives are used to get at coal that's close to the surface. (Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)
The Environmental Protection Agency
is holding up nearly 80 permit
applications for coal mining projects
because of concerns about about water
quality. Tamara Keith
reports this is creating a different
kind of concern in Appalachian coal
country:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency
is holding up nearly 80 permit
applications for coal mining projects
because of concerns about about water
quality. Tamara Keith
reports this is creating a different
kind of concern in Appalachian coal
country:
The applications involve mountain top removal coal mining. Explosives are used to get at coal that’s close to the surface.
In the past, the mining companies have been allowed to fill in valleys with the leftover rock and dirt. But the EPA is concerned that streams are getting buried and polluted so the agency is now giving that practice a serious second look.
Carol Raulston is with the National Mining Association. She says holding up those permits have people in the mining towns of Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee worried about losing their jobs.
“You really can’t operate these mines and employ people at them unless you’re able to construct the fills and in many of these communities they are the sole employer.”
An EPA spokesperson says protecting drinking water and coal mining jobs are both important. The agency says both can be done.
People who are often exposed to high levels of pesticides
could be at a higher risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease. The
GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports on the findings of a new study:
Transcript
People who are often exposed to high levels of pesticides could be at a higher risk of
developing Parkinson’s Disease. The GLRC’s Chris Lehman reports on the findings of a
new study:
Researchers say people who are routinely around pesticides are 70 percent more likely to
develop Parkinson’s Disease. Alberto Aschiero was the lead researcher. He says the
pattern seems to be true for both farmers and backyard gardeners. He says even though
the findings are not conclusive, they confirm the results of earlier studies:
“I think this is enough to recommend to people to be very conservative in using
pesticides, especially when one is not essential, like in some home and garden
applications.”
Aschiero says he’s not advocating a warning label be placed on pesticide products yet.
He says that would be more appropriate if researchers can pinpoint specific pesticides
that are linked to Parkinson’s disease.
A blue-green algae bloom. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
The experts who identified the Ten Threats to the Great Lakes for us
say nonpoint source pollution is one of the worst threats. That’s
pollution that doesn’t come out of a pipe but instead is washed from
streets and farm fields… and lawns. Americans use at least three million of tons
of fertilizer on their lawns every year. But the same compounds that make for a lush,
green lawn can make a stinky, slimy mess when they get washed into lakes and rivers.
Sarah Hulett looks at efforts to limit the amount of lawn chemicals that make their way
into the waterways:
Transcript
In our series, Ten Threats to the Great Lakes, we’ve been looking
at environmental problems affecting the health of the lakes. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham is guiding us through the
issues one-by-one:
The experts who identified the Ten Threats to the Great Lakes for us
say nonpoint source pollution is one of the worst threats. That’s
pollution that doesn’t come out of a pipe but instead is washed from
streets and farm fields… and lawns. Americans use at least three million of tons
of fertilizer on their lawns every year. But the same compounds that make for a lush,
green lawn can make a stinky, slimy mess when they get washed into lakes and rivers.
Sarah Hulett looks at efforts to limit the amount of lawn chemicals that make their way
into the waterways:
When newspaper headlines decried the death of Lake Erie in the 1970’s, Americans got
familiar with a new enemy of the environment. Scientists named phosphorus the major
culprit in the lake’s decline. And the reaction went a long way toward cleaning up the
lake: billions of dollars went into upgrades for wastewater treatment plants to reduce
phosphorus from sewage. And phosphate detergents have been mostly phased out of use.
But now that regulators have gotten a handle on the phosphorus coming from the most
obvious sources, they’re left with a much more difficult task: reducing phosphorus from
countless smaller sources that together add up to a lot of pollution.
One of those sources is lawn fertilizer. And Glenn Short says it’s easy to see what
happens when that fertilizer gets washed into the lake where he lives.
(sound of ducks quacking and waves)
“You have this, like, green slime floating all over the top of the lake water. Just pops up
everywhere and it can fill the entire lake surface – especially in the calmer bays. It can be
just miserable for swimming and things like that.”
Short sits on the board of the Lake Sherwood Association, in southeast Michigan. His
neighbors asked him to lobby the township to pass a ban on phosphorus fertilizer to
reduce the algae that takes over the lake in the summers. But he says at first, he was
reluctant to do it.
“I’m like any other homeowner. I don’t want government telling me what to do with my
own property. If I want a really nice lawn, I felt that I should be able to have one.”
But he started doing some research. And he found that enough phosphorus will
eventually kill a lake.
“Over a period of time, you get more and more organic material growing, you kill it off,
you just start filling up your lake. And eventually you have no lake anymore. You just
have a wetland. Well, I like my lake. I mean, I live on a lake. I like to use my lake.”
So Short drafted an ordinance to ban fertilizers containing phosphorus, and his township
board passed it. Several other local governments in the region have also enacted limits or
outright bans. And the state of Minnesota has statewide limits on phosphorus fertilizers.
It’s an approach the landscape industry calls unnecessary.
Gary Eichen is with Mike’s Tree Surgeons in southeast Michigan. It’s a company that’s
signed onto an initiative aimed at environmentally responsible lawn care.
(sound of spreader)
The company uses zero-phosphorus fertilizer on almost all the lawns it treats. Back at the
office, Eichen says the problem isn’t the chemicals – it’s that most homeowners don’t
know how to use them.
“They purchase from a source that is not educated in what the products are. He goes
home and starts going through this giant label on the back, and most of it might as well
be Egyptian hieroglyphics. He has no idea. So he ends up over-applying or incorrectly
applying.”
Eichen says there would be far fewer problems with runoff if homeowners left fertilizing
to the professionals. And he says it’s tough for the experts to stay in business when
there’s a patchwork of local ordinances to regulate chemicals like phosphorus.
But that’s exactly what the Environmental Protection Agency is asking communities to
do. Brad Garmon of the Michigan Environmental Council says that kind of bottom-up
regulation presents some challenges.
“It’s very difficult to see what’s working and what’s not, and to chart success. And I
know that a lot of the state programs are re-evaluating right now to see if the approach
they’ve been using over the last five or ten years has been working.”
It’ll take at least another five to ten years for Glenn Short to see the results of his
community’s phosphorus ban. The lake he lives on is part of a river system that
eventually dumps into Lake Erie. But he says just like that Great Lake, it’ll be worth the
wait and the effort to see his small lake bounce back to health.
In mountaintop removal mining, explosives are used to get at coal that's close to the surface. (Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)