There are 80,000 chemicals on the market. But the Environmental Protection Agency has only tested 200 of them for safety to humans - and banned only 5.
(Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
Congress might make our federal
chemical laws tougher. Rebecca
Williams has more:
Transcript
Congress might make our federal
chemical laws tougher. Rebecca
Williams has more:
There are 80,000 chemicals on the market. But the Environmental Protection Agency has only tested 200 of them for safety to humans – and banned only 5 of the toxic chemicals.
Senator Frank Lautenberg is a Democrat from New Jersey. During a recent hearing, he said the EPA is doing what it can. But its power is limited by the nation’s outdated chemical laws.
“They cannot protect our children with one hand tied behind their back. That’s why I’ll soon introduce a bill that will overhaul our nation’s chemical laws.”
The bill will likely require companies to prove a chemical is safe before manufacturing it or using it. Right now, it’s up to the government to prove a chemical is harming people or the environment before it’s banned.
Some Conservatives in Congress are opposed to this idea. They say this kind of bill would kill industry innovation.
The Rulison device at insertion, 1969 (Photo courtesy of the US Department of Energy Digital Photo Archive)
There are proposals to drill for oil
and gas very close to the site of a
nuclear explosion. The device was
exploded underground in western Colorado
40 years ago this month. Natural gas
from wells near the site could be
distributed throughout the U.S. Some
experts are concerned the natural gas
could be radioactive. Conrad Wilson
reports regulators could allow drilling
closer to the blast site in the next
couple of years:
Transcript
There are proposals to drill for oil
and gas very close to the site of a
nuclear explosion. The device was
exploded underground in western Colorado
40 years ago this month. Natural gas
from wells near the site could be
distributed throughout the U.S. Some
experts are concerned the natural gas
could be radioactive. Conrad Wilson
reports regulators could allow drilling
closer to the blast site in the next
couple of years:
On September 10, 1969 the Atomic Energy Commission detonated a 40-kiloton
nuclear bomb a mile and a half under ground. It was called Project Rulison. The
bomb was three times the size of the one dropped on Hiroshima.
The idea was to find peaceful uses for nuclear weapons. The federal government
hoped that nukes could be used to free up pockets of gas trapped below.
(sound of video)
The nuke did free up gas.
The government tested the gas by flaring it – burning it in the open – over the next
year. They discovered the natural gas was radioactive.
Marian Wells is a long time resident of Rulison. Her parent’s home was close to
the detonation site and the gas flares. Both of her parents died of cancer. So did
many of her neighbors.
She spoke before the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
“My parents were given no notice that you were flaring contaminated gas. And
yet both my parents died of cancer. Cancer is prevalent in this area. And yes, no
one has studied those cause and effect. You don’t really care about us.”
There’s been no government studies connecting cancer and the Rulison blast,
but the community remains fearful and suspicious.
Gas drilling is allowed as close as three miles of the blast site. That natural gas
is piped around the country.
Now some companies say they want to drill for natural gas within a half mile of
ground zero.
The Department of Energy maintains that, for the most part, the gas near the
blast site is safe, but there’s some uncertainly.
Jack Craig heads up the Rulison site for the Department of Energy. Craig says
drilling closer to the nuclear blast site should move forward slowly.
“What we’re saying is do it in a sequential manor. So that you come in slowly
testing the wells as you go in for contaminants – specifically tritium – and, if you
don’t find anything, move in closer.”
Tritium is a radioactive substance produced by the blast. Breathing tritium can
cause cancer.
Chris Canfield works on environmental protection for the state oil and gas
commission. He heads up an annual audit on the Rulison site.
Canfield: “Simply put, everything that’s coming out of the ground is being
sampled, being analyzed.”
Wilson: “If someone were to come to you and say they want to drill within the
half mile of the Rulison blast site, would you say that’s safe?”
Canfield: “I wouldn’t really know at this time.”
Canfield says that the state would require a special hearing before it would
approve any drilling permits any closer.
Oil and gas commissioner Jim Martin says there are still too many unanswered
questions to allow drilling that close to the blast site.
“There are significant information gaps and that makes is very difficult to really
understand the risks either to the workers or to the public who live within some
distance of the drill site.”
Martin says he understands why people are skeptical. He says the United States
has made a lot of mistakes with radioactive materials. Navajo uranium miners
got cancer because of radio exposure. People downwind of above ground
detonations suffered. Martin says skepticism is warranted.
“So it’s not unreasonable to ask some pretty tough questions of the federal
government before we go further into that half mile perimeter and produce more
gas.”
Gas that could be burned to heat homes across the U.S.
The Energy Star Program is "a joint program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy helping us all save money and protect the environment through energy efficient products and practices" (Photo courtesy of Energy Star)
The federal government’s Energy
Star program is supposed to highlight
products that save you energy and money.
Rebecca Williams reports some independent
testers found Energy Star might be falling
a bit short:
Transcript
The federal government’s Energy
Star program is supposed to highlight
products that save you energy and money.
Rebecca Williams reports some independent
testers found Energy Star might be falling
a bit short:
The magazine Consumer Reports tests all kinds of products to see how they
stack up. They were testing refrigerators when they stumbled on something
odd.
Steven Saltzman is a Deputy Editor with Consumer Reports. He says the
Energy Star program relies on government standards that are outdated in some
cases. For example, one standard is to test a refrigerator’s energy use with the
icemaker off.
“But we found that when you turn the icemaker on – the refrigerator actually
used twice as much energy as it would with the icemaker off.”
Saltzman is not saying you can’t trust the Energy Star label. But he says the
tests need updating. And there’s a dark Energy Star secret, manufacturers get
to do their own testing in most cases – so there’s not a whole lot of third party
checking going on.
CAFÉ standards are based on fuel economy tests from the 1970s.
(Photo by Ed Edahl, courtesy of FEMA)
Congress recently increased the Corporate Average
Fuel Economy standards, or CAFÉ standards. The new standard calls
for a car company’s entire fleet to average 35 miles per gallon
by 2020. But Mark Brush reports – there’s a problem with these
standards:
Transcript
Congress recently increased the Corporate Average
Fuel Economy standards, or CAFÉ standards. The new standard calls
for a car company’s entire fleet to average 35 miles per gallon
by 2020. But Mark Brush reports – there’s a problem with these
standards:
CAFÉ standards are based on fuel economy tests from the 1970s.
But the way people drive has changed a lot since then.
Engines are more powerful, people drive faster, and more cars use air conditioning.
That means these old tests don’t reflect the gas mileage we get today.
Experts say car companies are really averaging anywhere from 20 to 30% less than the
standards called for.
Jim Kliesch is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He says the system should
change.
“If your representative is standing on Capitol Hill and telling you that they’ve raised
standards to 35 miles per gallon, you’d like to go out and buy a vehicle that can average
35 miles per gallon. Not one that averages 26, 27, 28 miles per gallon.”
There is a more accurate test available today.
Kliesch says it could be used to set CAFÉ standards if members of Congress require it.
Chronic Wasting Disease is killing wild deer and elk. And it’s slowly spreading to new areas in North America. Right now, tests for the disease are done after the animals are dead, but researchers say they might be getting closer to a test that can be given to live animals. The GLRC’s Christina Shockley reports:
Transcript
Chronic Wasting Disease is killing wild deer and elk. And it’s slowly spreading to new areas
in North America. Right now, tests for the disease are done after the animals are dead,
but researchers say they might be getting closer to a test that can be given to live animals.
The GLRC’s Christina Shockley reports on what this might mean in the fight against the disease:
Chronic Wasting Disease, or CWD, causes deer and elk to waste away and die.
The disease is causing hunters and wildlife officials to worry about the
future of the wild deer population. Right now, testing a brain sample from a
dead animal is the sure-fire way to detect the infectious protiens, called prions, that
cause the disease.
Alan Young is a Veterinary Science professor at South Dakota State University.
He’s developing the new test.
“Our ultimate goal is basically to develop a test for infectivity in blood,
by taking a blood sample, and then analyzing for the presence of the infectious prion protein.”
Young says a blood test would let deer and elk farmers know if their herds are
infected before the animals die. He says the research could also lead to a cure for CWD.
Some people use chemicals on their lawn to fertilize or kill weeds. But many cities are now restricting use of lawn chemicals because they are concerned about the safety of these chemicals. (Photo by Ilja
Wanka)
As the weather’s heating up… so are ad campaigns on the use of lawn pesticides and fertilizers. The campaigns are responding to a growing number of local restrictions on the use of these lawn chemicals. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams has more:
Transcript
As the weather’s heating up, so are ad campaigns on the use of lawn
pesticides and fertilizers. The campaigns are responding to a growing
number of local restrictions on the use of these lawn chemicals. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams has more:
Dozens of cities in North America, mostly in Canada, now have restrictions
on using lawn chemicals. In response, lawn care and chemical companies
formed a PR group called Project Evergreen.
The group is producing ad campaigns targeted to landscape companies. One ad
warns that the industry will lose money because of the regulations. Den Gardner directs Project Evergreen.
“We felt it was important that there be another side to that story, and all
the products that are used and are being recommended for elimination all
have been approved by the EPA and have gone through years and years of study
and tests.”
Critics of lawn pesticides argue that the chemicals have not been thoroughly
tested.
In a brochure published on its website, the EPA states that although all
pesticides legally sold in the U.S. must be registered by the agency,
“registration is not a guarantee of safety.”
Deer hunters try their best to prevent deer from sensing their presence - from hiding atop platforms to wearing camouflage clothing. (Photo by Alan Mead)
...to making their breath smell like pine? The idea of "Gum-O-Flage" is something to chew on. (Photo by Nara Vieira de Silva)
In much of the region, deer hunting season is in full swing. Hunters are taking to the woods doing their darndest to keep deer from spotting them. Now, an avid deer hunter has taken camouflage to another level. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley explains:
Transcript
In much of the region, deer hunting season is in full swing. Hunters are taking to the
woods doing their darndest to keep deer from spotting them. Now, an avid deer hunter has
taken camouflage to another level. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley
explains:
Neil Brentl says hunters know when a deer smells you.
“They make a very, very distinct like, huff sound, and you know. Every hunter knows
the sound. When you hear it, you almost wanna get out of your tree because you’re done.”
Brentl says that powerful sense of smell is a deer’s first line of defense. A few years
ago, Brentl’s brother suggested that perhaps the deer were sensing Brentl’s breath. The
idea for “gum-o-flage” was born.
“I took, like a regular gum, actually, like Bubble Yum, and chewed all the flavor out of
it, and added pine needles to it believe it or not. And I found that it was working.”
Brentl says the gum isn’t scientifically proven to work. But he says he hopes to have some
tests done soon. He says so far, “gum-o-flage” has been a hit with hunters in Upper Wisconsin.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Christina Shockley.
The phrase "where the rubber meets the road" is taking on new meaning
in some states. Ohio, for example, is testing rubber in the mix of
asphalt it uses to repave roadways. Ohio and other states say this is
one way to recycle old tires. But, as the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Julie Grant Cooper reports, researchers aren’t sure it’s
cost effective:
There are 80,000 chemicals on the market. But the Environmental Protection Agency has only tested 200 of them for safety to humans - and banned only 5. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
