The federal government has a plan that it hopes
will continue to protect the bald eagle. But the
proposal would allow times when the bird
could be killed or moved. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
The federal government has a plan that it hopes
will continue to protect the bald eagle. But the
proposal would allow times when the bird
could be killed or moved. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The bald eagle population in the US has recovered, but critics worry
that without Endangered Species Act protection some landowners and
developers could carelessly harm a lot of the large birds. So, the
Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing a permit that would authorize
very limited killing or harming of eagles during otherwise lawful
activity.
Service Director Dale Hall says the permit would also let eagle nests
be moved if they pose a threat to human safety, such as near airport
runways:
“We expect to issue very few of these permits, since they would only be
available for safety emergencies.”
Conservation groups pushed the government for clearer plans to protect
the bald eagle, and generally welcome the new language. But a public
comment period could bring additional changes.
Anya Dale (pictured above) says being in nature "forces you to look at your priorities." (Photo by Kyle Norris)
Here’s the latest installment in our
occasional series about people’s connections to
the environment. Producer Kyle Norris has been
asking people if they feel close to nature. Today
she hikes with her friend Anya Dale,
an amateur bird-watcher and nature enthusiast:
Transcript
Here’s the latest installment in our
occasional series about people’s connections to
the environment. Producer Kyle Norris has been
asking people if they feel close to nature. Today
she hikes with her friend Anya Dale,
an amateur bird-watcher and nature enthusiast:
Anya and I are walking through a shady, hilly forest. And birds are
chirping everywhere. Usually when Anya hikes, it’s just her and nature.
Microphones and reporter friends usually don’t make it into the
equation, so I think Anya’s a little nervous:
“See um, yeah, that’s where it is (bird sounds) I don’t know if you can
see it. Sorry I’m totally getting distracted. Do you see, it’s like
through that tree, the one tree behind it, now it’s flying back. I
think they’re red belly woodpeckers. Let’s go down closer.”
Anya is little and feisty. She buys almost all of her clothes from
second-hand stores. I always see her in earth-toned corduroys and
fleece vests. She’s this eco-groovy chick walking down the path:
“Well, right now, we are walking through Bird Hills. Checking out the
trails. I partially try to just zone out a little bit. Coming out here to a
certain extent is an escape to do much of anything. But I also just
find myself listening to all the birds and trying to figure out what
kind they are and where they are. It’s usually not too successful, but it’s
still fun just listening and paying attention to what’s around.
Anya says that when she doesn’t spend time outside, she gets grouchy.
She recently visited New York City. Even though she had a fun time, she
says the city just doesn’t move her the way spending time in nature
does. Like the time she went backpacking with her friend:
“It forces you to look at your priorities and what does, it really
matter you don’t like your hair cut you got, does it really matter that
you don’t do all of these things. Or do you have time to focus on what
is important that you accomplish in your life? Or the people in your
life. And it forces you to slow down.”
As we walked through the woods, Anya pointed out tons of birds. We
listened to one that sounded like a monkey. Anya said that bird always
make her laugh. In fact, a lot of birds catch her attention. We
couldn’t walk for more than a few minutes without her stopping mid-
sentence to track some bird:
“Part of what the awe I have in birds is that they’re really tough. And
also just being able to survive the winters or even just the cold
nights, they essentially go into torpor, it’s sort of like a type of
hibernation not quite as deep. But they go into this every night and
lose fifty percent of their body weight and they have to shiver and
shiver and shiver to wake themselves back up. And it’s a huge stress on
their body and they truly, what they eat during the day is what’s going to keep them
alive at night. But you just hear their pretty songs and they’re flying
around playing and they’re incredibly tough.”
They’re not just tough. They have a bird’s eye view of life, literally.
Anya told me that she admires how birds can really see the big picture
of things. That’s because they migrate thousands of miles. She says
that larger view is something she strives to see in her daily life:
“And I think about them, they can just, not that there’s an infinite
number of place they can fly to, but they sort of get this more
regional or global view of the world than most other species or other
animals. So, sometimes I think that’s got to be amazing to see things
on a bigger scale like that…Sorry I always get distracted as soon as I see
a bird, so it’s hard for me to focus!”
I’m not a birder and I don’t really spend a lot of time paying
attention to birds. But after Anya and I went hiking I started to
notice them. Like the other day a cute little bird with a cherry-red
splash on its head stood next to me on the sidewalk. And I heard
woodpeckers during my morning run through the woods. Birds are
everywhere. And maybe you’re like me… you didn’t even notice them,
until somebody pointed them out.
Switchgrass is an easily grown biofuel crop, which can be used to make ethanol. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
This summer, drivers got a crash course in the dangers of fossil fuel. Gas prices shot above three dollars a gallon, concerns about global warming surged, and instability continued to plague areas of the world where oil is produced. We’ll be taking a look at some of the technologies that could help the US kick its fossil fuel habit. We’re starting with an alternative fuel that’s been sprouting up in gas stations across the region. Dustin Dwyer has this look at the promise, and the limitations of ethanol:
Transcript
This summer, drivers got a crash course in the dangers of fossil fuel. Gas prices shot above $3 a gallon, concerns about global warming surged, and instability continued to plague areas of the world where oil is produced. We’ll be taking a look at some of the technologies that could help the US kick its fossil fuel habit. We’re starting with an alternative fuel that’s been sprouting up in gas stations across the region. Dustin Dwyer has this look at the promise, and the limitations of ethanol:
This summer, Misty Childs found a way to do something positive about the fossil fuel problem. She says that she and her husband realized their Chevy Silverado pickup could run on E-85, a blend of 85 percent corn-based ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.
E85 burns cleaner than gas alone, so it’s good for the environment. And the ethanol is made from corn grown in the US. As she tops off her tank at a gas station, Childs says that makes a difference.
“It means a lot that we’re doing something for our country here, and not having to rely on others.”
Detroit’s Big Three automakers have been making a big push for E-85 in the last year. E-85-capable vehicles get the automakers a credit on federal fuel economy standards. So, even if drivers put regular gas in the vehicles instead of E-85, Detroit still gets a credit for doing better. And this summer, as more buyers became aware of the problem with fossil fuels, E-85 was just about the only alternative Detroit had to offer.
But ethanol as it’s currently made has limits. Jason Hill is a researcher at the University of Minnesota. He recently published a study on the long term outlook for corn-based ethanol.
“What we found is if you convert every corn kernel we produce in this nation to ethanol, we would be able to offset only about 12 percent of our national gasoline usage. So that’s not that large.”
That’s every corn kernel, including what we currently use for food. Which brings up another problem with ethanol: if E85 jumps in popularity, will that mean less corn for animal feed and grocery stores?
Maybe. Corn originally became popular because it was already being grown around much of the country, with help from federal subsidies. And ethanol processors, such as Archer Daniels Midland, also got tax breaks for making corn-based fuel.
But there’s another option for ethanol. Inside a lab at Michigan State University, researchers are working on the next generation of the fuel. This is what’s called cellulosic ethanol. Instead of using grains like corn kernels, cellulosic ethanol is made from the starches in plant cell walls. It can be made from pretty much anything that stands up straight – wood, prairie grasses and corn stalks.
That offers the possibility to increase the ethanol output for every acre of land devoted to the crops, and those crops don’t require fossil fuel-based fertilizer. They also don’t require planting every year by gas or diesel burning tractors the way corn does.
Professor Bruce Dale heads research into cellulosic ethanol at MSU. He says the current problem with cellulosic ethanol is finding a cheap way to break down the stiff materials. His lab uses ammonia to do the trick.
“The idea is to make cheap sugar. And the plant cell walls potentially could give you the cheapest sugar on the planet, if we could figure out how to get at that sugar easily. That’s what our ammonia process does in combination with the enzymes.”
It turns out that, much like a teenager eating pop-rocks, cars and trucks get a whole lot of energy from fuels based on sugar. Dale says most woody plants have plenty of sugar, but it’s really hard to get that sugar out.
Dale says some cellulosic ethanol could be on the market in the next few years, and the fuel could eventually sell for about 60 cents a gallon.
Right now, ethanol is still hard to find at the pumps. And one study says, even with major investment over the next decade, cellulosic ethanol might only equal half of our current oil useage by 2050.
That’s still a lot. But to really eliminate the need for gas, many experts say it’ll take more than just one technology.
Donna Smrdel stands in her backyard by the "flood wall." (Photo by Julie Grant)
According to the city manager, the wall was not intended to protect property from so-called "volume" floods. (Photo by Julie Grant)
Engineers suggest homeowners research safe housing elevations and flood walls in order to live safely near water. (Photo by Julie Grant)
Many people are drawn to live near rivers, lakes and other bodies of water. That means they have to take special care in case of floods, but flood walls and levees don’t always protect them. In one town, residents are asking why the wall separating their backyards from the neighboring river didn’t hold back the water. The GLRC’s Julie Grant reports on the safety of floodwalls and building in a floodplain:
Transcript
Many people are drawn to live near rivers, lakes and other bodies of water. That means
they have to take special care in case of floods, but flood walls and levees don’t always
protect them. In one town, residents are asking why the wall separating their backyards
from the neighboring river didn’t hold back the water. The GLRC’s Julie Grant reports on
the safety of floodwalls and building in a floodplain:
Dale and Donna Smrdel bought a condominium along a river just a few months ago.
This summer they’ve been sitting in the backyard on a wall overlooking the river and
watching the sunset. But now, that concrete wall is broken and falling away from the
bank. It’s crumbled in some spots and held together only by twisted rebar.
“This is where the largest portion simply fell away because of the water. It was a torrent.
It was so strong it picked up a camper and flung it over this wall. Because the water was
so high above the wall, that it was like a toy. It just floated away like a toy.”
People on rafts rescued everyone from
second floor windows. Donna Smrdel says they thought this wall would protect them
from flooding:
“I don’t think there was a single person here that believed this was not going to keep us
safe. I think we all believed that even if the water did rise that it wouldn’t hurt the
retaining wall. None of us are engineers. We looked at it, it looked safe. We believed
we were safe. We had no idea, we just had no idea.”
This story is not uncommon. Last year, people in New Orleans expected a flood wall to
protect them from rising waters brought on by Hurricane Katrina. People along the
Mississippi River expected levees and flood walls to protect them from the Great Flood
of ’93. Many flood walls hold, but when they don’t, the people who thought they were
protected quickly find out they’re victims. In the case of the Smrdels, it turns out that
wall wasn’t even meant to protect them from high water.
Painesville City Manager Rita McMahon says the Smrdels live near the exit of the river,
where ice often jams in spring:
“Well, that wall was built by the private property owner as actually a flood protection
from ice dams. It wasn’t intended to protect the property from this type of a flood. This
was a volume flood that came from the south to the north. It was just a wall of water, so
to speak.”
The Smrdel’s condo community was built in the 100-year floodplain 30 years ago. Back
then, there weren’t regulations on building in a flood-prone area. Today, new buildings
have to be elevated.
That’s better protection then a wall, but flood walls and levee protection give people a
sense of security. Often they don’t think about that protection failing them, and the
consequences of what that failure will mean to their homes and families. Engineers say it
is possible to live safely by the water, but homeowners have to do their own investigating
to find out the safety of housing elevations and flood walls. We spoke with Carm
Marranka, a structural engineer with the US Army Corps of Engineers:
Julie: “When you look at Katrina, when you look at the Mississippi floods in ’93, and when we
look up here, do you think that sometimes flood walls, even those built by the Army Corps,
provide a false sense of security?”
Marranka: “I don’t know if it’s a false sense of security. I think
with the design and assumptions that I’m familiar with the factors of safety, those
structures are built at. And good maintenance, I think that’s a big issue. They have to be
maintained. They cannot be allowed to fall into disrepair.”
When the Army Corps builds a flood wall, Marranka says it’s usually up to the local
community to maintain it, but the local governments often don’t have enough money to
pay for that maintenance. Donna Smrdel doesn’t trust any of it anymore:
“I mean, even if they bulldozed it, what kind of retaining wall will they build next? If
this didn’t work, and we all believed it would work, what do you build next?”
All those other people flooded out of their homes will also have to decide whether they
trust flood prevention technology, and if living by the beautiful scenery is worth the
threat of floods.
The first logging under new Bush administration rules has begun in a National Forest roadless wilderness area. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The first logging under new Bush administration rules has begun in a National Forest
roadless wilderness area. The GLRC’s Lester Graham reports:
This is the first logging since the Bush administration eased a rule put in place by the
Clinton administration. That rule had made tens of millions of acres of wilderness areas
off-limits to logging, mining and development.
Protesters near Grants Pass, Oregon delayed the logging for a few hours by blocking a
bridge, but one person was arrested and the blockade removed to allow loggers to enter.
The logging operation is cutting down trees killed by a fire in 2002. The timber is being
taken from the site by helicopter.
According to an article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the logging began after a
federal judge refused to block it pending the outcome of a lawsuit challenging the Bush
administration’s new “roadless rule.” The suit was brought by conservation groups and
the states of Oregon, Washington, California and New Mexico. The court ruling is not
expected before September.
Farmers who use a highly toxic pesticide will have to quickly find an alternative. That’s if the EPA sticks with a
decision to phase it out in four years. But some farmers say
they have no alternative. The GLRC’s Tracy Samilton
reports:
Transcript
Farmers who use a highly toxic pesticide will have to quickly find an alternative. That’s if
the EPA sticks with a decision to phase it out in four years. But some farmers say they
have no alternative. The GLRC’s Tracy Samilton reports:
Carbofuran has been widely used to combat aphids for many crops, including
soybeans, corn, tobacco and wine grapes. Many farmers have been phasing in
crops that are bred to be resistant to aphids. But agriculture industry
officials say in many instances, there’s no replacement for carbofuran.
Dale Huss of artichoke grower Ocean Mist Farms says carbofuran is the only
pesticide known that kills aphids that feed on artichokes. He says it’s
possible his industry will collapse:
“I don’t think we quite understand the full impact it’s gonna have on us. It really has us
concerned.”
Agriculture lobbyists say they’ll press the EPA to reverse the decision.
Environmental groups say the EPA did the right thing. Even small amounts
of carbofuran are lethal to birds, and it’s been blamed for the deaths of
millions of birds over the twenty years it’s been in use.
