The major risks with tar sand include dealing with pollution, and with lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.(Photo courtesy of the US DOE)
Several investors’ groups want four major oil companies to reveal the risks of getting oil from Canadian tar sands. Rebecca Williams reports shareholders will be considering this at BP’s general meeting this week:
Transcript
Several investors’ groups want four major oil companies to reveal the risks of getting oil from Canadian tar sands. Rebecca Williams reports shareholders will be considering this at BP’s general meeting this week:
Tar sands are kind of like they sound: they’re sand or clay soaked in oil. Canada’s tar sands are the second largest oil reserves in the world, so oil companies are all over them. But it’s a dirtier source of oil.
Several investors groups have filed shareholder resolutions with BP, Conoco-Phillips, Shell, and Exxon-Mobil. They want companies to reveal the risks to stockholders of getting oil from tar sands.
Emily Stone is with Green Century Capital Management.
“We want these companies to be more forthright about what they see as the big risks and how they’re mitigating those risks.”
She says risks include dealing with pollution… and lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.
BP did not want to be recorded for this story. But in a statement to shareholders, BP told them to vote no. BP says Canada’s oil sands are a proven and secure source of oil.
If all goes according to plan, the nuclear reactors will go up in six to seven years and cost around 14 billion dollars.
(Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
The Obama Administration
announced that it will back
the cost of constructing two
new nuclear reactors. Mark
Brush reports, if they’re
constructed, they’ll be the
first reactors built in the
country in nearly three decades:
Transcript
The Obama Administration
announced that it will back
the cost of constructing two
new nuclear reactors. Mark
Brush reports, if they’re
constructed, they’ll be the
first reactors built in the
country in nearly three decades:
The Southern Company plans to build the reactors in Georgia. They say, if all goes well, they’ll go up in six to seven years and cost around 14 billion dollars.
Investors have seen nuclear energy as a risky bet. But now that the President says the government will guarantee the loans, Wall Street might be enticed back to nuclear energy.
And then there’s the question of safety. President Obama’s Energy Secretary is Steven Chu. He says these new generation reactors are safe.
“We expect that the newer generation reactors will be ideally completely passively safe. Which means that, uh, you don’t actually need to control the reactor. If you lose control of it, it will not melt down.”
Some environmentalists say nuclear energy is not worth the costs – and there’s still no permanent place to store nuclear waste that’s radioactive for thousands of years.
Researchers say some companies bought renewable power because customers pushed them to.
(Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
The market for renewable solar
and wind power is growing quickly.
Most people assume that growth
has been mandated by government.
But Shawn Allee found
a report that challenges that:
Transcript
The market for renewable solar
and wind power is growing quickly.
Most people assume that growth
has been mandated by government.
But Shawn Allee found
a report that challenges that:
The report’s from the Center for Resource Solutions, an advocacy group.
Orrin Cook was a co-author. He totaled up growth in sales of wind, solar and other renewable energy between 2003 and 2008. He compared how much growth came from government mandates and how much was bought voluntarily. Cook says the voluntary market grew a tad faster.
“States requiring renewable energy and federal government requiring renewable energy is really just part of that equation. Another part is businesses and individuals buying renewable energy when they don’t have to.”
Cook says this voluntary renewable energy market grew because some companies have eco-minded managers. But he says companies also bought renewable power because customers pushed them to.
Cook looked at federal figures that came out before the financial crisis.
Anderson and Abbe Turner are in the midst of adding a creamery to their goat farm so they can make cheeses. (Photo courtesy of Lucky Penny Farms)
A lot of companies have been slowing
down and cutting back because of the
economy. But tough times aren’t
stopping some new businesses in the
midst of the ‘local food movement’
from moving forward. More than a
year ago, Julie Grant spoke with the
owners of a goat cheese farm. She
visited them again this year. Now,
they’re opening a new creamery, despite
lots of economic obstacles:
Transcript
A lot of companies have been slowing
down and cutting back because of the
economy. But tough times aren’t
stopping some new businesses in the
midst of the ‘local food movement’
from moving forward. More than a
year ago, Julie Grant spoke with the
owners of a goat cheese farm. She
visited them again this year. Now,
they’re opening a new creamery, despite
lots of economic obstacles:
Abbe Turner just quit her day job. She’s had a good-paying
university job – with benefits – for many years. But today
she’s waiting for the delivery of a $5,000 dollar pasteurizer.
“There we go. There’s my pasteurizer.” (cheering)
The truck arrives with a six foot round stainless steel tank.
“I never thought I’d be so excited by a 3,000 pound hunk of
metal in my entire life. But…” (laughter)
Abbe and her husband, Anderson Turner, started dreaming
of goat cheeses three years ago. This big hunk of steel will
help them finally to get their creamery off the ground.
“The pasteurizer will allow us to make cheese in small
batches, artisan cheeses. We’ll do some cheves in the
pasteurizer, some tommes and probably a goat gouda.”
The Turner’s dream started after they bought a few goats for
their hobby farm. They made a little cheese for the family.
And they liked it. So they kept getting more and more goats.
Now they have more than 160 Nubians, La Manchas, and
Alpines. Abbe and Anderson had been getting up before
dawn every morning to milk them. By hand. Then they
would get their 3 kids ready for school and head off to their
full-time day jobs.
The Turners wanted to automate milking, to make things
easier and faster. They even had a group of 23 investors
chipping in to renovate their barn into a milking parlor. But
that was last fall.
“Unfortunately, with the stock market crash, the calls kept
coming in. ‘Hi. We really believe in what you’re doing.
Unfortunately, I’m watching my investments tank and a goat
cheese operation is not something I can write a check for
right now.’”
Some people thought it would be smart to forget about
starting a new creamery in the midst of a recession. Matt
Ord used to sell the Turners feed for their goats. But he had
to shut down his family business when the economy
crashed. Now he’s working with Abbe to build her goat farm
and creamery – even though he’s not convinced it’s the right
time for this kind of venture.
“She’s nuts. But I hope everything goes good for her, I really
do. She’s got a lot of patience and a lot of nerve starting this
business right now. It’s a very scary time. And I know
things are very tough for everybody.”
Abbe likes to think of her family as bold, rather than nuts.
And most of her investors have come back on board since
last year.
Her husband Anderson Turner is glad she’s starting full-time
to get the creamery off the ground instead of waiting for the
economy to turn around.
“I can’t think negatively about opportunity. My time is now.
My opportunities are now, my life is now. So, this is the
cards I’m dealt with. I’ve got to deal. So, let’s go.”
The Turners believe that the local food trend is just getting
off the ground, and that support for local foods will more than
compensate for the tanked economy. They say restaurants
have already put in orders to buy their cheeses.
The two presidential candidates square off on their views about nuclear power (Photo courtesy of the Commission on Presidential Debates)
Both major party candidates for
president are promising a much greener
energy plan than the current administration.
But there are big differences in the ways
each would go about it. In the first part
of our series on shifting the nation’s
energy policy, Julie Grant takes a look
at the candidates’ views on nuclear power:
Thanks to the Public Radio Exchange for providing the audio for this piece.
Transcript
Both major party candidates for
president are promising a much greener
energy plan than the current administration.
But there are big differences in the ways
each would go about it. In the first part
of our series on shifting the nation’s
energy policy, Julie Grant takes a look
at the candidates’ views on nuclear power:
John McCain and Barack Obama both claim to take climate change, and our role in creating it,
seriously. When asked during the second presidential debate about their plans to stem climate
change during their first two years in office, McCain offered ‘straight talk’.
“What’s the best way of fixing it? Nuclear power.”
More nuclear power is the centerpiece of Senator McCain’s energy policy. He’s told audiences
about the power of nuclear to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“Here we have a known, proven energy source that requires exactly zero emissions.”
And he says the 104 nuclear reactors currently operating in the U.S. make a big difference.
“These reactors alone spare the atmosphere from about 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
that would otherwise be released every year. That’s the annual equivalent to nearly all the
emissions of all the cars we drive in America.”
John McCain wants to build 45 new nuclear reactors in the U.S.
Barack Obama, meanwhile, has focused more on renewable energy sources – wind, solar, and
on energy efficiency. But he says he’s not opposed to nuclear power.
“I favor nuclear power as one component of our overall energy mix.”
Senator Obama doesn’t have any plans to build new nuclear power plants. Obama doesn’t think
nuclear is he best option. It’s expensive. And he insists its operation and waste disposal must be
safe.
Senator McCain sees Obama’s use of ‘safe’ as a code word.
“Senator Obama will tell you, as the extreme environmentalists do, that it has to be safe. Look
we’ve sailed navy ships around the world for 60 years with nuclear power plants on them. We
can store and reprocess spent nuclear fuel, senator Obama, no problem.”
But safety and radioactive nuclear waste are still unsettled issues for many people.
Andrew Hoffman is professor of sustainable business at the University of Michigan. If the country
is serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, he says it has to consider nuclear power.
But Hoffman says the issue of radioactive waste has to be resolved.
“And I think this is an area that the government has to step in. We have nuclear waste being
stored at facilities all over the country. That’s just not a smart way to handle this.”
The economics of nuclear are also uncertain. Lots of power companies lost their shirts back in
the 1970s, building nuclear plants.
Travis Miller is a stock analyst with the firm Morningstar.
“The financing costs are extreme. There is quite a bit of risk building new nuclear plants. They
take many years to build, cost billions of dollars to build, and without some kind of backing, I think
there are
Plenty of people in the utility industry who still remember those days when they did get in trouble
with these very expensive, risky project.”
Senator McCain says government subsidies should help build new nuclear power plants. But
Andy Hoffman at the University of Michigan says people and investors will still have concerns.
“The government can just sort of announce, we’re going to support nuclear, but there are other
things that have to come into play to make investments attractive to investors so that they’ll want
to do it.”
Hoffman says the government will have to persuade the American people nuclear power offers
more benefits than problems.
The price of gasoline and diesel fuel from
foreign oil is making people think about other ways
to fill up. Lester Graham reports the coal industry
is pushing the idea of making diesel out of coal
from the US:
Transcript
The price of gasoline and diesel fuel from
foreign oil is making people think about other ways
to fill up. Lester Graham reports the coal industry
is pushing the idea of making diesel out of coal
from the US:
The technology to make diesel fuel out of coal has been around for a while. Germany
used it in World War II.
Recently, researchers at Rutgers and the University of North Carolina developed a
more efficient way to convert coal to diesel.
So, what’s stopping coal-to-diesel? Money and risk.
Coal to diesel is feasible – if the price of oil is above $50 a barrel. Oil is around $143 a
barrel right now. So, the money is good.
Phil Gonet is president of the Illinois Coal Association. He says now investors want
some government assistance.
“That guarantees that investors will at least get their money back if OPEC starts to play
around with the world price of oil.”
And make diesel from foreign oil cheaper than diesel from domestic coal.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Congress is investigating whether investors are inflating the prices of food and gas for profit (Photo courtesy of the USDA)
The price of food is going up and some
members of Congress want to know why. The Senate
recently held hearings on whether investors in
the commodities market are artificially inflating
prices. Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
The price of food is going up and some
members of Congress want to know why. The Senate
recently held hearings on whether investors in
the commodities market are artificially inflating
prices. Mark Brush has more:
Big investors are moving money out of stocks and other investments and into
commodities.
In the last five years, the amount of money in commodities markets has
increased 20 fold. And there’s a theory that these investors are driving up food and gas
prices.
Timothy Wood says that’s not so. He’s the editor of ResourceInvestor.com.
Instead, he
says you’re paying more mostly because the dollar is worth a lot less these days. He also
says Congressional mandates to turn corn into fuel are driving up corn prices.
“When corn is so much a part of the American food chain, and the global food chain, it is
just a complete and utter farce that this has gone and been legislated.”
Wood says Congress should let the markets sort themselves out. But some members of
Congress wonder if big investors in commodities are getting rich at the expense of
families.
While new factories take up a lot of land, some corporations, such as GM, are setting aside acres for wildlife on corporate campuses. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)
General Motors’ newest auto plant is the first to be certified gold by LEED. Included in the plans were several acres set aside for wildlife. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)
About a quarter of all private property in the
U.S. is owned by corporations. In the past, many
companies have gone to great expense to maintain
their property with manicured landscaping and green
lawns. Now, as environmental issues are becoming an
important focus in the business world, more
corporations are turning their land into wildlife
habitats. As Gretchen Millich reports,
they are finding it’s good for the environment and
it’s good for business:
Transcript
About a quarter of all private property in the
US is owned by corporations. In the past, many
companies have gone to great expense to maintain
their property with manicured landscaping and green
lawns. Now, as environmental issues are becoming an
important focus in the business world, more
corporations are turning their land into wildlife
habitats. As Gretchen Millich reports,
they are finding it’s good for the environment and
it’s good for business:
Setting aside land for wildlife is becoming a big trend among
corporations in the US. For example, near its plant in Muscatine, Iowa,
the Monsanto Company set aside a 500-acre sand prairie. It’s home to
some rare species, including the Illinois mud turtle. Just outside of
New York City, Exxon Mobil is protecting 750 acres as a habitat for
birds like wild turkeys and wood ducks.
Bob Johnson is president of the Wildlife Habitat Council.
The council brings together businesses and environmental groups to
conserve and restore natural areas. His group has helped set up
hundreds of wildlife preserves at corporate facilities:
“Most of our members are not recognized as being very green and I think
that is really changing now because many companies are trying to find
ways of being a lot more conscientious about materials and energy. But
the real bottom line is habitat. Habitat is the greatest factor in the
control of the decline of species on the planet and I think companies
are realizing this is important for them to do.”
Johnson says there are lots of advantages to being green in the world of
business. Studies show that employees are happier and more productive
when they work for a business that shares their values. Also, it’s much
less expensive to maintain a wildlife habitat than to fertilize and mow
several acres of grass.
Bridget Burnell works at a new General Motors assembly plant near Lansing, Michigan.
Burnell is an environmental engineer. She oversees 75 acres on the factory grounds
that’s been set aside as wildlife habitat:
“What we’re walking up to right now is the first major wetland that you
come across. This is what all the employees can see as they are
driving along the main road east of the plant.”
It’s an unlikely spot for a wildlife refuge: on one side a sprawling
automobile factory, on the other, the intersection of two major
highways. It’s noisy, but still somehow serene.
Birds, turtles, muskrats, and frogs all live here undisturbed. A great
blue heron is flying over the wetland and in the distance, we see three
whitetail deer. Burnell says on nice days, teams of employees come here
to take care of the grounds and sometimes they work with community
groups:
“We’ve had about 20 events this year that we’ve had different community
organizations out here. Some of it’s directly related to educational
type things, like learning about the wetlands and the prairie
and different types of habitat. Others are specific to a particular
project, maybe wood duck boxes or song bird boxes, that type of thing.”
This factory is the only automotive plant to receive certification from
the US Green Building Council for Environmental Design and Construction.
GM saves about a million dollars a year in energy costs and more than 4
million gallons of water. And although there’s no direct cost savings on
a wildlife habitat, GM is finding that preserving natural areas can
improve the company’s image in the community, and also with its
customers and investors.
Bob Johnson of the Wildlife Habitat Council says these wildlife projects
are attractive to green investors, who choose stocks based on how a
company deals with the environment. He says some investors believe that
environmental responsibility is a reflection of how a business is
managed. And a lot of that information is available on the Internet:
“The individual on the street can do that today. They can evaluate this
kind of information and make judgments. So I think people are looking
for ways of distinguishing where they are placing their resources.”
Johnson says since corporations are the largest group of landholders,
they’re in a good position to slow down the fragmentation of wildlife
habitat. He says corporate leaders are discovering that with a little
effort, they can win friends and gain a competitive advantage.
For the Environment Report, this is Gretchen Millich.
Heavy cleanup crews from the Genesee County Land Bank use chain saws, wood chippers, tractors and brute force to move piles of debris on the lot of an abandoned house on the north side of Flint, Michigan. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
Up until three years ago, rundown homes and abandoned lots were multiplying in the city. With the creation of the Land Bank, some people believe the city's image is beginning to turn around for the better. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
A next door neighbor to the abandoned house visits the cleanup crew. She has had to bear the eyesore and health risk next door for several years. The Land Bank currently has custody of about 2,800 properties like this in and around Flint. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
One community is fighting its problems of abandoned lands and unpaid property taxes. Those problems have led to a decaying inner city and increased suburban sprawl. The new tool the community is using is called a “land bank.” It uses a unique approach to try to fix up properties that otherwise often would be left to deteriorate. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
Transcript
One community is fighting its problems of abandoned lands and unpaid property taxes.
They’ve led to a decaying inner city and increased suburban sprawl. The new tool the
community is using is called a “land bank.” It uses a unique approach to try to fix up
properties that otherwise often would be left to deteriorate. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
(sound of work crews operating wood chipper)
Cleanup crews are sending downed branches through a wood chipper on a vacant lot.
They’re also removing tires, used diapers, car seats, sinks, old clothes and dead animal carcasses.
The workers are from the Genesee County Land Bank in Flint, Michigan. They’re trying to
make abandoned property useful again. Dan Kildee is the Genesee County Treasurer and the brains
behind the land bank. He thinks this new approach can recover unpaid property tax money and help
improve the Flint Metro area.
“The community gets to make a judgment on what we think we should do with this land. We get
to take a deep breath.”
Empty lots and rundown homes have been multiplying for a generation. That’s left the city of
Flint in a terrible economic state. But the land bank is beginning to change things.
Until just three years ago, Michigan was like most other states. No one had come up with
a solution. The state would auction off a city’s tax liens. Then conflict between the tax
lien buyer and the property owner could go on for up to seven years. In the meantime,
properties were left to neglect and often vandalized.
Under this new program, the treasurer’s office forecloses on a property and hands it over
to the land bank, which acts as the property manager. The land bank might then demolish
a house; it might throw out the owner and let a tenant buy it; or it might auction it off
to the highest bidder. A private investor can’t just buy a tax lien. He has to buy the
property along with it and take care of it.
The land bank is financed in two main ways: through fees on back taxes and through sales
of the few nicer homes or buildings the land bank acquires that bring in relatively big
profits. Treasurer Dan Kildee says it makes sense to take that revenue to fix up old
properties and sell them to people who deserve them.
“There is no system in the United States that pulls together these tools. Both the
ability to quickly assemble property into single ownership of the county, the tools
to manage it and the financing tools to develop that property.”
The land bank program hopes to change the perception of Flint. As thousands of abandoned
homes, stores and vacant lots become eyesores, people and their money go other places,
usually to build more sprawling suburbs. The perception that people are abandoning the
inner city then speeds up that abandonment. Many people who can afford to leave the city do.
And those who can’t afford to move are left behind.
According to data gathered by the research group Public Sector Consultants, Flint has the
state’s highest unemployment and crime rates and the lowest student test scores.
Art Potter is the land bank’s director. He thinks the downward spiral can be stopped.
When it is, those folks in the central city won’t have to suffer for still living there.
“Even though the City of Flint has lost 70,000 people in the last 30 years, the people who
are still here deserve to have a nice environment to live in. So our immediate goal is to
get control and to clean these properties now.”
Urban planning experts are watching the land bank approach. Michigan State
University’s Rex LaMore says Flint is typical of Midwestern cities whose manufacturing
base has shrunk. Private owners large and small have left unproductive property behind.
As the land bank steps in, LaMore says it’s likely to succeed and become an example that
other municipalities can follow.
“They can begin to maybe envision a city of the 21st century that will be different than
the cities of the 20th century or the 19th century that we see around the United States.
A city that reflects a more livable environment. So its an exciting opportunity. I think
we have the vision; the challenge is can we generate the resources? And the land bank model
does provide some opportunity to do that.”
But the land bank is meeting obstacles. For example, the new mayor of Flint who took over
in July canceled the city’s existing contracts. A conservative businessman, the mayor is
suspicious of the city’s past deals. They included one with the land bank to demolish 57
homes. This has slowed the land bank’s progress. Its officials are disappointed but they’re
still working with the mayor to get the money released.
(sound of kids chatting, then lawn mower starts up)
The weeds grow rampant in a neighborhood with broken up pavement and sometimes
no houses on an entire block. It’s open and in an odd way, peaceful. Like a
century-old farm. It’s as if the land has expelled the people who invaded with their bricks,
steel and concrete.
In the middle of all the vacant lots, Katherine Alymo sees possibilities.
“I’ve bought a number of properties in the auctions from the land bank and also got a side
lot acquisition from them for my house. My driveway wasn’t attached to my house when I
bought it. And it was this huge long process to try to get it from them. But they sold it
to me for a dollar. Finally.”
And since then, she’s hired people to fix the floors, paint walls and mow the lawns.
She’s also finding buyers for her properties who want to invest in the city as she has.
Together, they say they needed some help and the land bank is making that possible.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chris McCarus.
The major risks with tar sand include dealing with pollution, and with lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.(Photo courtesy of the US DOE)
