A new report concludes that under the Bush Administration, polluters are less likely to be taken to court. (Photo by Shealah Craighead, courtesy of the White House)
The Bush Administration is not punishing polluters as much. That’s according to a new
report issued by a group of former Environmental Protection Agency attorneys. Mark
Brush reports:
Transcript
The Bush Administration is not punishing polluters as much. That’s according to a new
report issued by a group of former Environmental Protection Agency attorneys. Mark
Brush reports:
The report concludes that under the Bush Administration, polluters are less likely to be
taken to court. They’re less likely to be investigated. And they’re less likely to pay civil
or criminal penalties when compared to the Clinton Administration. Eric Schaeffer is the
director of the Environmental Integrity Project, the group that released the report. As an
example of lax enforcement, he says the EPA often takes no action when power
companies pollute:
“I think power plants routinely violate particulate matter standards. They exceed opacity
requirements. They are even in some cases blowing stack tests, which are really hard to
fail, and you just don’t see much response.”
An EPA spokesman says they’re committed to holding polluters accountable. As proof,
he says they’ve reached a record number of settlements in the last three years that force
companies to clean up.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s new rule regulating
mercury emissions from cement kilns is being challenged by both sides.
As Tracy Samilton reports, the cement industry says the rule goes too
far. Environmentalists say it doesn’t go far enough:
Transcript
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s new rule regulating
mercury emissions from cement kilns is being challenged by both sides.
As Tracy Samilton reports, the cement industry says the rule goes too
far. Environmentalists say it doesn’t go far enough:
The rule regulates mercury emissions from new cement kilns only. The
EPA doesn’t think cement kilns are that big of a factor in mercury
pollution, but the EPA’s estimate is based on voluntary disclosure by
kiln operators. Some kilns were found to be emitting ten times what
they’d been claiming.
EarthJustice Attorney James Pew says he’s skeptical that the mercury
emissions are as low as the EPA thinks they are:
“There’s strong reason to believe that it’s a lot worse than that, in
fact it could be off by an order of magnitude.”
Meanwhile, the cement industry is challenging the EPA’s requirement
that new kilns install mercury-scrubbing technology. Industry officials
say more study is needed to show that it works.
Billions of fish and other aquatic organisms
are killed every year by industrial plants located on
waterways. Brad Linder reports that environmental
regulators are hoping to bring those numbers down:
Transcript
Billions of fish and other aquatic organisms
are killed every year by industrial plants located on
waterways. Brad Linder reports that environmental
regulators are hoping to bring those numbers down:
Power plants, oil refineries, and other industrial plants often have
cooling systems that rely on river water. But when water is sucked
into the cooling tanks, so are fish and other tiny organisms.
John Hughes is the state of Delaware’s environmental secretary. He says companies could use systems that recycle water but few want to spend the money:
“Every refinery in America looks up into the air and
worries about their emissions. That’s where the bulk of their
investments go in pollution controls. And when you bring up water, you
get that blank look, like ‘what now?'”
Hughes says federal rules let companies sidestep water regulations if
upgrading is considered too costly. But Hughes says
he is asking local companies to step up… and if that doesn’t work,
his state might pass tougher regulations.
Shoreline property owners are asking the nation’s highest court to reverse a ruling that says the public has the right to walk along the beaches of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta reports:
Transcript
Shoreline property owners are asking the nation’s highest court to
reverse a ruling that says the public has the right to walk along the
beaches of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick
Pluta reports:
The property owners are challenging a Michigan Supreme Court
decision. The state court held that the public owns the Great Lakes
beaches from the water to the high water mark. The case was filed by a
woman who was seeking the right to walk along the shoreline of Lake
Huron.
David Powers is an attorney with the property owners group Save Our
Shoreline. He says the Michigan decision rolled back property owners’
rights…
“And so, if the state has taken private property in violation of the
Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court should be very concerned about
that.”
The other side in the case says the Great Lakes shoreline is such a unique
resource that no one person should be allowed to claim exclusive rights
to it.
There’s no word on when the Supreme Court might make a decision on
taking the case. Lakeshore property rights are being litigated in other
Great Lakes states and whatever the Supreme Court decides to do could
have an effect on those cases.
A government watchdog group says a slew of recent court rulings against the U.S. Forest Service show that the agency isn’t doing its job. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:
Transcript
A government watchdog group says a slew of recent court rulings
against the
U.S. Forest Service show that the agency isn’t doing its job.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:
The group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility – or
PEER – cites 44 cases over the last two years in which the Forest Service violated
environmental laws it’s supposed to enforce. PEER cites an internal Forest Service memo. It details instances in which the agency had to pay attorney fees to environmental groups that
successfully sued over issues like illegal logging and over-grazing on forest lands.
Jeff Ruch is the executive director of PEER. He says during the
Clinton
Administration, there were only a handful of adverse rulings each year.
“And they’re now losing these cases at a greater rate than two a month. So
roughly every 10 days, the Forest Service is found guilty of violating a law
they’re supposed to be implementing, in a federal court.”
But a spokeswoman for the Forest Service says a closer look at the
rulings
shows a different picture. She says almost half the cases cited by PEER were
based on decisions the Forest Service made prior to President Bush taking
office.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.
Dysart Woods in southeast Ohio is an old-growth forest. Many of the trees are more than 300 years old. (Photo courtesy of dysartwoods.org)
Ohio Valley Coal Company's mine operations map. Green = Dysart Woods Old-growth forest. Yellow = longwall mining panels. Red = Room and pillar mining. (Image courtesy of Buckeye Forest Council)
Ohio University professor and hike leader Phil Cantino provides some perspective on this massive oak.
The need for cheap energy is coming into conflict
with efforts to preserve a forest. Coal mining companies are using a technique that causes the land to subside and sometimes changes natural underground water systems. Environmentalists say mining underneath a forest preserve could destroy the ecosystem. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports on environmental activists who are defending the
forest:
Transcript
The need for cheap energy is coming into conflict with efforts to preserve a forest.
Coal mining companies are using a technique that causes the land to subside and sometimes
change natural underground water systems. Environmentalists say mining underneath a forest
preserve could destroy the ecosystem. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lisa Ann Pinkerton
reports on environmental activists who are defending the forest:
For decades, the coal mining industry has been using a technique of extraction called
long wall mining. Industry officials say it’s the most effective way to get the bituminous
coal out of the ground. In traditional room and pillar mining, the land above is not disturbed.
But the long wall machine leaves no support for the 1000-foot tunnel created in its wake. After
the coal is extracted, the ground caves in, causing the land to sink.
Dysart Woods, in southeastern Ohio, is slated for such a fate. The conservation group,
Buckeye Forest Council, wants to block the woods from mining. Its members believe long
wall mining will destroy the old-growth forest. The four hundred and fifty acres, fifty-five
acres of the trees are more than 300 years old. Fred Gittis is an attorney who has volunteered
his services to protect the woods.
“And these woods are precious, and they are among the last old-growth forest areas remaining,
not only in Ohio, but in this part of the country. Recently a documentary was filmed in Dysart Woods, because it has some of the conditions that would have existed at the time of George
Washington’s life.”
Gittis argues state should repeal the mining permit granted for Dysart Woods. Ohio Valley
Coal was granted the permit in 2001. As steward of the woods, Ohio University disputed the
permit for three years. But last November, it agreed to drop its appeal, in exchange for $10,000 from the state to study the forest’s water, as it is undermined. Ohio Valley
Coal Company would drill the wells needed. But the Buckeye Forest Council says a study doesn’t
solve the problem.
“First of all it is just a water monitoring project. It offers no protection to the woods.
Second of all, they don’t have the base line data right now to compare to what it normal.”
That’s Susan Heikler, Executive Director of the Buckeye Forest Council. When Ohio University
accepted the mining permit, her organization took up the fight. The group worked with lawyer
Fred Gittis and nationally known experts to review the science of the Coal Company’s mining
plan. Gittis says the Council’s experts were not impressed.
And, both hydrogeologists and mining experts have indicated that the basic science related
to this mining permit is, not to be insulting but, junk.”
The plan calls for long wall mining within 300 feet of the old-growth forest. However,
experts from the Buckeye Forest Council say a 1500 foot buffer around the woods
is the only way to insure the protection of the hydrology – the natural water system that
sustains the forest.
In a major concession two years ago, the Coal Company agreed not to long wall mine directly
under Dysart Woods. Instead, room and pillar mining is planned. The Company says that will
delay subsidence for centuries to come. Attorney Fred Gittis says without core samples from
directly under the woods, the company doesn’t have the data to back up this claim.
“If you don’t know what that rock is, if it’s soft like claystone or shale, it can collapse.
And so its pretty basic stuff.”
Attorneys for the company declined to be interviewed for this story. In statements, the
Company defends its lack of data by pointing to exemptions they were granted by the Department
of Mineral Resources. The Company stands by its assertion that, quote, “trees and other surface
vegetation will absolutely not be affected by mining.” But in September, the story changed. In
court, a mining consultant for the company, Hanjie Chen, testified that the forest floor would
sink 5 inches. Attorneys for Ohio Valley Coal abruptly stopped his testimony after this
statement. But Gittis says the damage to the coal company’s case is already done.
Although Buckeye Forest Council rested its case in July, the defendant, Ohio Valley Coal is
still adding witnesses and dragging out the case. Fred Gittis says the Company is trying to
exhaust the Buckeye Forest Council’s legal funding. He adds that this is why he volunteers his
expertise.
For the time being, mining under the old growth forest has been pushed back until the hearings
conclude in November.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lisa Ann Pinkerton.
A lawsuit brought by several environmental groups in California seeks to increase protection against invasive species. The groups hope to force the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate ballast water discharge. Now, officials from the eight Great Lakes states are writing-in to support these groups in their lawsuit. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports:
Transcript
A lawsuit brought by several environmental groups in California seeks
to increase protection against invasive species by forcing the
Environmental Protection Agency to regulate ballast water discharge.
Now, officials from the eight Great Lakes states are writing in to
support these groups in their lawsuit. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports:
Researchers say ballast water from oceangoing ships is one of the
primary methods by which invasive species enter the Great Lakes.
State Attorney General Mike Cox wrote the amicus brief for Michigan.
He says under current EPA rules any ship that claims it doesn’t have
ballast can, in fact, issue discharge into the water.
“Now we know that right now and on any given day, about 85 to 90
percent of these ships claim that they don’t have any ballast on board.
That’s a claim that stretches credulity, quite simply because all ships
need ballast if they don’t have cargo.”
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates that it
costs 45 million dollars a year just to control zebra mussels and sea
lampreys in the Great Lakes. Cox and the seven other Great Lakes
Attorneys General say the EPA must do more to protect the waters from
invasive species. The AGs have filed eight separate amicus briefs
supporting the case against the government. For the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium, I’m Celeste Headlee.
The Environmental Protection Agency took aim at lead back in
the 1970’s banning its use in gasoline and house paint. Those actions
significantly reduced lead exposure. But the EPA still ranks lead
poisoning as one of the top environmental health concerns for children.
Now, one state is trying a new approach to deal with the problem… an
approach inspired by the recent tobacco settlements. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Wendy Nelson 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:
A new report concludes that under the Bush Administration, polluters are less likely to be taken to court. (Photo by Shealah Craighead, courtesy of the White House)
