Author: Bob Kelleher

Cleaning Up Coal-Fired Power Plants

  • Tom Micheletti (right), and Excelsior Energy Vice President of Environmental Affairs, Bob Evans (left). They are locating where the proposed power plant will be built near the town of Taconite, Minnesota. (Photo by Bob Kelleher)

Acid rain, mercury pollution, and huge amounts of the heat-trapping gas carbon-dioxide are the down sides of burning coal in electric power plants. And yet, some energy experts are saying America should be using more coal. They say new coal technology can produce electricity with few of the pollution problems of traditional coal power plants. Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

Acid rain, mercury pollution, and huge amounts of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide are the down sides of burning coal in electric power plants. And yet, some energy experts are saying America should be using more coal. They say new coal technology can produce electricity with few of the pollution problems of traditional coal power plants. Bob Kelleher reports:


Coal has a well deserved bad reputation. Typical coal burning power plants release mercury, sulfur, nitrogen oxides, and lots of carbon dioxide. Those releases mean toxins in the air, soot, acid rain, and many believe global warming. But Tom Micheletti says there’s a way to use coal with very little pollution.


Using heat, steam, pressure, and oxygen, coal can be broken down to a relatively clean gas, and a handful of other chemical products. The gas is burned, to turn generators and produce electricity. The technology is called Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle. Micheletti says, the technology isn’t new, but applying it this way is.


“All we’re doing is marrying the gasification technology, with a technology that’s been well established, the combined cycle gas technology – power plant technology. And all we’re doing is simply putting those two technologies together.”


Micheletti is Co-President of Excelsior Energy, a company formed to build the nation’s first large scale coal gasification electric power plant in northeast Minnesota. At 600 megawatts, it would dwarf demonstration plants now online in Indiana and Florida.


Some experts say coal gasification is not only promising, it’s more practical than nuclear power, natural gas, solar or wind. Daniel Schrag is a climatologist and head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment.


“We have a lot of coal in the US. We’re very fortunate that way. The problem is that coal produces more carbon dioxide per unit energy than any other fossil fuel. And so, when we burn coal and make electricity, it’s really bad for the climate system.”


Schrag says there’s more carbon dioxide around us now than humans have ever experienced. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Most scientists believe it blankets the earth, forcing temperatures higher.


Schrag says, when used to generate electricity, coal gasification has big advantages over conventional power plants, because it can capture CO2.


“You get more energy for the amount of coal you put in, and that’s good for carbon emissions. The other thing is that it seems to be cheaper in an IGCC plant, or a gasification plant, to capture the carbon dioxide after one extracts the energy from the coal, and then makes it much easier to capture it and inject it into a geological reservoir.”


The key, Schrag says, is a process called sequestration. You capture, and then sequester it, or lock that carbon dioxide away, where it won’t escape into the atmosphere. It’s already being done.


This is the Dakota Gasification Company, just outside Beulah, North Dakota. Here they turn coal into a burnable gas and almost a dozen other products. They also produce plenty of carbon dioxide, but the CO2 is not vented into the air; it’s trapped and compressed. That’s the noise.


The CO2 is piped more than 200 miles into Canada where it’s pumped into oil wells, forcing the last oil out and leaving the CO2 underground. Near oceans it can be pumped under deep ocean sediments, where it stays put.


And that’s all very good, but others say even good power plants might be a bad idea.


Ross Hammond is with the Minnesota based organization Fresh Energy. Hammond says gasification’s proponents are overlooking conservation and the opportunities for clean energy.


“When we’ve exhausted all the clean options including biomass and photovoltaics, and wind and the other options, then we need to look at coal.”


But Harvard’s Daniel Schrag says it’s not as simple as pushing money toward pollution free energy.


“And the answer is complicated. The answer is perhaps not. It may be that coal is so cheap that even the extra cost of capturing the carbon and storing it underground may still make it cheaper than the alternatives, than wind and solar.”


Schrag says we’ll need it all – nuclear, hydro, wind and biomass. But to satisfy the nation’s hunger for energy, he says we’ll need coal – best used in coal gasification.


For the Environment Report I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

Wetlands to Slow or Grow Global Warming?

  • John Pastor is trying to figure out how climate change will affect bogs and fens like this one. (Photo by Bob Kelleher)

In northern Minnesota, a researcher says wetlands like bogs could be key to how fast the climate changes worldwide. And the areas like the upper United States and Canada in the bull’s eye for rapidly changing temperatures and rainfall. The GLRC’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

In northern Minnesota, a researcher says wetlands like bogs could be key to how fast the
climate changes worldwide. And the areas like the upper United States and Canada in the
bull’s eye for rapidly changing temperatures and rainfall. The GLRC’s Bob Kelleher
has more:


What have wetlands, like fens and bogs, got to do with global warming? John Pastor says,
plenty.


Pastor is a professor and researcher with the Natural Resources Research Institute of the
University of Minnesota-Duluth. When Pastor straps on his hip waders, he goes where
almost no one else dares to go: into northern Minnesota’s fens, where water can be
several feet deep, and onto the bogs, where the mass of plant material is so thick it floats
on standing water.


A seven year-long study has revealed that fens and bogs can either help slow global
warming, or accelerate it. Pastor says all cards are off the table if temperatures keep
rising:


“The one problem in science that has the most ramifications throughout all of science – it’s
global warming.”


We’re in a swamp north of Duluth, Minnesota. Actually, it’s a fen, and it borders some
higher landscape nearby that’s a bog. What fens and bogs have in common is water and
peat, the not quite decomposed stuff left over when plants die. Pastor says peat lands are
one of the world’s significant bank accounts for carbon. They keep carbon out of the
atmosphere.


“Peat lands cover only 3% of the earth’s surface, but they contain 30% of all the carbon
that’s in all the soil in the world, locked in that partially decomposed organic matter, that
peat.”


Minnesota has vast peat lands that have been storing carbon for 10,000 years, but even
the size of Minnesota’s peat lands pales compared to those further north – around
Canada’s Hudson Bay, or in the Russian republics – all regions Pastor says that are facing
higher temperatures.


“All of the global climate models, one thing they all agree on, is that the greatest amount
of warming will occur in areas from Minnesota northward, and then inland – mid-
continent areas. So here we are. We’re sitting right now, right in the bullseye of the
greatest amount of warming that will happen on the face of the earth.”


This is the question: Will higher temperatures help trap more carbon in bogs, or force
more carbon into the atmosphere?


In this bog, Pastor’s been trying to figure out how warmer weather will affect bogs and
fens, and, in turn, what role the wetlands will play in global change. One thing he’s
found: the results depend largely on the water table, and that’s going to depend on
rainfall.


In some combinations, say with additional heat and additional rainfall, bogs could thrive,
trapping more carbon. That would be good. In other conditions, say with more heat but
less rainfall, bogs and fens could die and decompose, releasing even more carbon into the
atmosphere. That, Pastor says, would be bad:


“Now we have kind of a double whammy. Not only are we putting carbon dioxide from
fossil fuel into the atmosphere, the warning from that could cause the carbon from the
peat land also to go into the atmosphere and accelerate the warming.”


Predicting an outcome becomes mind numbing. Pastor’s working with new mathematical
theory to try to determine at what point global warming has gone too far.


“And so what seems to be happening is the temperatures of the earth have crossed some
kind of a threshold, where all the sudden, before that they crossed that threshold, the old
earth that we grew up with was stable. Now, it’s becoming very unstable, and ice sheets
are collapsing, birds and plants are migrating – everything’s happening very, very
quickly. And we’re going to enter into a new kind of earth that has a different kind of
stability – a different stable endpoint.”


Pastor says there’s no more complicated problem in all of science than global warming,
and no more important problem. Global warming, he says, changes everything, from the
forests to the wetlands. Pastor’s hoping the new mathematical models will provide more
definitive answers in time to do something about the outcome.


For the GLRC, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

Trees Under the Influence of Ozone and Co2

  • The circle of trees, as seen from the outside. The white pipe seen near the top delivers either normal air, one, or both of the experimental gasses to the trees. (Photo by Bob Kelleher)

In northern Wisconsin, they’re finding that gasses such as carbon dioxide and ozone will change the makeup of what survives in a future forest. An open air experiment called the Aspen FACE project has been testing trees in elevated levels of ozone and carbon dioxide for ten years. But they don’t know whether the forest can change as quickly as the climate does. The GLRC’s Bob Kelleher has more:

Transcript

In northern Wisconsin, they’re finding that gasses such as carbon dioxide and ozone will
change the makeup of what survives in a future forest. An open air experiment called the
Aspen FACE project has been testing trees in elevated levels of ozone and carbon dioxide
for ten years. But they don’t know whether the forest can change as quickly as the
climate does. The GLRC’s Bob Kelleher reports:


We’re standing inside a circle of trees: paper birch, aspen, and sugar maples, maybe 15
feet high. And they’re surrounded by a ring of large white pipes spraying the trees with
gasses – that’s the high pitched noise.


Among 12 different circles of trees, some get carbon dioxide, or ozone, or a
combination. These are the very gasses believed responsible for changing the climate –
they hold in the earth’s warmth, forcing surface temperatures higher.


Dave Karnosky, with Michigan Technological University, heads the Aspen FACE project,
near Rhinelander, Wisconsin. Karnosky’s trying to predict how these gasses will affect
the northern forest:


“Those species, with aspen and aspen mixed with birch and maple make up a huge
portion of our northern forests, and there was a lot of interest by industry as well as to
what’s going to happen in the future as these greenhouse gasses continue to build up in
the atmosphere.”


Even ten years ago, when this project started, it was clear that carbon dioxide and ozone
levels were on the increase.


Ozone is destructive. It’s bad for people and for plants. Carbon dioxide, on the other
hand, is what we exhale, and what green plants need to grow. Both gasses have been on
the increase, largely due to burning fossil fuels such as in coal-fired power plants and in
cars and trucks. Karnosky says he knew aspen were quite responsive to both CO2 and
ozone:


“We weren’t sure much about the interaction, but we were sure interested in what would
happen with that, because those two pollutants are both increasing at about the same rate
in the atmosphere.”


The Aspen FACE project has shown that most trees grow well when exposed to carbon
dioxide, and most do poorly in ozone. With the gasses combined, bad effects tend to
offset the good ones, but results vary greatly between the different kinds of trees, and
even within a single species of trees, like aspen.


Karnosky has found there’s a tremendous range of genetic variation even among the
relatively few trees they’ve tested. That variation makes clear predictions difficult:


“It’s very tough to make a single prediction for species or individuals within species,
there’s so much genetic variation. So that’s been one of the, I think, kind of the highlights
from what I see in terms of a bit of a surprise for us.”


That genetic variation could be the forest’s salvation. Karnosky thinks that if some
aspens, for example, die off from ozone, maybe others will do okay, and fill the forest
back in. Sugar maples, which seem more tolerant of ozone, could replace some aspen
and birch. Then, the mix of trees in the forest would change, but the forest would
survive.


But, there could be problems if the air changes the forest too quickly. Neil Nelson is a
plant physiologist with the US Forest Service. Nelson says the region’s paper and pulp
industries rely heavily on aspen trees. He’s uncertain how quickly the forest, and forest
industry, can respond if aspen begins to die off – and how long it might take for other
trees to grow in.


“One of my colleagues has said, you know, the key issue may be whether things change
too fast for our society and economy to adjust to, and I think that’s an open question.
There seems to be great plasticity, and we aren’t quite there in terms of predicting from a
forest management standpoint what these results mean.”


It takes time to grow trees, maybe too much time if the climate suddenly shifts. The
Aspen FACE project has already provided regulators preliminary data on ozone. It could
become the basis for future pollution law. But, even ten years into the Aspen Face
project, there’s still a lot more data to harvest among the aspen and hardwoods.


For The GLRC, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

States Seek to Tighten Ballast Water Laws

Port officials are wary about new state regulations intended to keep invasive species out of the Great Lakes. Several states are working on laws that would tighten restrictions on ballast water in foreign ships. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

Port officials are wary about new state regulations intended to keep
invasive species out of the Great Lakes. Several states are working on
laws that would tighten restrictions on ballast water in foreign ships. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortiums Bob Kelleher reports:


Proponents hope to keep creatures like zebra mussels from getting
established in the Great Lakes. The non-native plants and animals arrive
in ship ballast water, carried from overseas ports.


Adolf Ojard is the Duluth Seaway Port Director. He says a state-by-state
approach to regulate ballast water is the wrong approach.


“We’re not the only area that is dealing with invasive species. Every
harbor and estuary around the world has a similar concern. It needs to be
dealt with on an international and world level, so that it can be a level
playing field for everybody out there that is involved in transportation.”


Michigan has passed new rules with stiff fines for ships with untreated
ballast water. Wisconsin and Indiana are expected to consider similar
rules; and Minnesota’s Attorney General says he’ll propose the
regulations this spring.


For the GLRC, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

Major Dock Corrosion Stumps Officials

  • The Duluth Seaway Port Authority's bulk cargo dock is typical of many in the port. Officials are troubled by corrosion appearing on the docks in the harbor - the steel is corroding much faster than normal. (Photo by Bob Kelleher)

Corrosion is eating away at the steel walls that hold one of the Great Lakes’ busiest harbors together. The corrosion is unlike anything known to be happening in any other Great Lakes port. But other port officials are being encouraged to take a closer look at their own underwater steel. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

Corrosion is eating away at the steel walls that hold
one of the Great Lakes’ busy harbors together. The
corrosion is unlike anything known to be happening in
any other Great Lakes port. But other port officials
are being encouraged to take a closer look at their own
underwater steel. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Bob Kelleher reports:


Some kind of corrosion is eating away at the Duluth
Seaway port’s docks. The docks are those long
earth-filled metal rectangles where ships from around
the world tie up to load and unload. Those docks are
lined with sheets of steel, and the steel is rusting
away. Jim Sharrow is the Duluth
Seaway Port Authorities Facilities Manager.


“It’s corroding quickly – much faster than people expect
in fresh water. And our main concern is that we’ll lose
the integrity and the strength of the dock long before
expected, and have to do steel replacement at $1,500 or
more per lineal foot, much earlier than ever would have
been expected.”


Corrosion should be a slow process in Duluth’s cold
fresh water. But, Sharrow says, there’s evidence it’s
been happening remarkably quickly for about thirty years.


“What we seem to see here is corrosion that started in
the mid 1970s. We have steel that’s 100 years olds
that’s about as similarly corroded to steel that is 25
to 30 years old.”


It’s a big problem. There’s about thirteen miles of
steel walls lining docks in the harbor that serves
Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin. There’s half
again as many feet of wooden docks, held together with
steel pins. There’s corrosion on the legs of highway
bridges and the giant
steel ore docks that ship millions of tons of taconite
– a type of iron shipped to steel mills in Gary,
Indiana and Cleveland, Ohio.


“We characterize this as a 100-million dollar problem in
the harbor. It’s a huge problem, and what is so odd
about this is that we only see it happening in the
navigational area of the Duluth-Superior Harbor.”


The harbor links the St Louis River with Lake Superior.
Go a few miles up the river and there’s little corrosion
. So it doesn’t seem like the problem’s there. But, back
in the harbor, at the current rate of corrosion, Sharrow
says, the steel will fail quickly.


“I figure that in about 10 years at the current rate,
we will have to start replacing steel.”


“Particularly marginal operators could decide rather
than repair their docks it would be better for them to
go out of business, and we’re hoping that that isn’t
the case here.”


While the cause is a mystery, there’s no shortage of
theories. It could have something to do with stray
electrical voltage; water acidity; or the kinds of
steel manufactured in recent years. Chad Scott
discovered the corrosion in the late 1990’s. He’s an
engineer and a diver. Scott suspects
a micro-biological connection. He says there might be
something growing in small round pits that form on the
steel.


“We cleaned up the water. That’s the main thing –
that’s one of the main changes that’s happened since
the 70s, is we’ve cleaned up our water. We’ve cleaned
up our harbor, which is a good thing. But, when we
cleaned things up we also induced more dissolved oxygen
and more sunlight can penetrate the water, which tends
to usually promote more growth – more marine
microbiology growth.”


A team of experts met in Duluth in September to share
ideas. They came from the U.S. Navy, The Army Corp of
Engineers, and Ohio State University. And they agreed
there’s something odd going on – possibly related to
microbes or water chemistry. They also recommend that
other Great Lakes ports take a closer look at their
underwater steel. Scott says they at least helped
narrow the focus.


“We have a large laundry list right now. We want to
narrow that down and try to decide what is the real
cause of this corrosion. And these experts, hopefully,
will be able to get us going on the right direction,
so we can start doing testing that will identify the
problem.”


With the experts recommendations in hand, port
officials are now planning a formal study. If they
do figure out the cause, then they’ve got to figure
out how to prevent it. They’re in a race with
something, and right now they don’t even know with
what.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

Eagle Soaring Off Endangered Species List

  • Researcher climbing up to the eagles’ nest. A pair of eaglets are nesting there. (Photo by Bob Kelleher)

The American Bald Eagle is expected to come off the endangered species list soon. Once a victim of hunting and pollution, the eagles are rebounding, but scientists say monitoring must continue, for the sake of the eagles and the sake of the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

The American Bald Eagle is expected to come off the endangered species
list soon. Once a victim of hunting and pollution, the eagles are
rebounding, but scientists say monitoring must continue, for the sake
of the eagles and the sake of the environment. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:


If you’re looking at all, it’s hard to miss the bald eagles here. The
majestic birds glide overhead, or silently perch on a waterfront tree.
Their nests – made of branches – fill the treetops – sometimes ten feet
across, close to the lakes of Northern Minnesota’s Voyageurs National
Park.


Twenty years ago you might have been hard pressed to spot America’s
national symbol. Park Biologist Lee Grim says, it was obvious that
eagles were struggling.


“We saw how some of these birds were ill, and sick, and they had avian
pox and things. Something was keeping them from being healthy.”


An eagle found here in 1989 had the highest blood concentration ever
found of contaminants like the chemical PCB.


“So, we wanted to know why is that up here in Northern Minnesota, in
the middle of a beautiful, you know, almost wilderness area.”


It’s still a mystery how industrial chemicals like PCB’s get here, but
we do know what’s hurt the bald eagles in the past. The insecticide
DDT made bird eggs fragile – more likely to break under an eagles
weight than hatch. And Grim says DDT was all over the place. It was
sprayed on the region’s forests to kill insects like the spruce
budworm.


“DDT is pretty much everywhere, it has been, you know. And it’s a
pretty long lived chemical.”


At the top of the food chain, chemicals like DDT accumulate in the
eagle’s bodies. Sick eagles can indicate a poisoned environment. To
test the environment, you test the eagles.


(snd of climbing)


A naturalist is scaling 90-feet up one of the park’s White Pine trees
to the huge nest at the top. The parent eagles circle overhead –
noisily upset. There’s a pair of hatchlings – fuzzy, beaky, and
surprisingly big 8-week old bald eagles. They have bright yellow feet,
with shiny black, and what will become very dangerous talons. Soon,
one’s squirming in an orange bag, and lowered into the hands of
graduate students Faith Wiley and Katie Parmentier.


(snd of students talking about baby eagle)


In minutes, the young female is back up; short a few feathers for
mercury testing; and a little blood for other chemical tests. There’s
a pair of metal bands riveted around her ankles.


Bill Bowerman is an environmental toxicologist from Clemson University.
His testing proves that chemicals like DDT and PCB’s are slowly going
away, but chemicals were only part of the problems for bald eagles.
Man was another problem. It took decades to get people to stop
shooting eagles; or to catch them accidentally in beaver traps, but
it’s better now.


“It’s evident, when I go out to landowners that have eagle nests on
their property, that they know how to manage their eagles; how to keep
people away; and how to protect that eagle during that critical nesting
period.”


It’s believed there were once half a million bald eagles in North
America. As people spread, by the 1950’s, bald eagles nearly vanished.
In the lower 48 states, the last few hung on in places like the Great
Lakes.


In Voyageurs Park, bald eagle numbers have jumped from seven nesting
pairs in 1973, to 28 pairs today. There are more than 7-thousand
breeding pairs nation wide, but there are always new threats. One of
the nation’s first victim’s to West Nile disease was the bald eagle in
New York area zoos. Bowerman says several pair are missing now in
Michigan, and there are always new chemicals. Traces of poly
brominated flame retardants are doubling in the Great Lakes basin every
3 to 5 years. Bowerman says the chemical industry needs strict
monitoring.


“As long as we maintain our vigilance about the environmental toxicants
that are being created each year, we should be having the eagles
protected.”


Bowerman supports de-listing, but doesn’t want the birds in the
predicament they were twenty years ago. An official announcement of
the bald eagle’s de-listing is expected later this year.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Related Links

BIOLOGISTS TRACK LYNX’S RETURN

  • Canada lynx are rare in the U.S. Their populations fluctuate following the population cycles of snowshoe hare, their main prey. Photo courtesy of the Gov't of NW Territories.

Some areas of the Great Lakes are again home to an elusive wild cat. Canada Lynx disappeared from the region about twenty years ago. Now, considered threatened, lynx are turning up in the Superior National Forest for the first time in decades. Biologists are trying to figure out why they’ve come back, and whether they’ll stay. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

Some areas of the Great Lakes are again home to an elusive wild cat. Canada Lynx disappeared
from Minnesota about twenty years ago. Now, considered threatened lynx are turning up in the
Superior National Forest for the first time in decades. Biologists are trying to figure out why
they’ve come back, and whether they’ll stay. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher
reports:


Lynx have tufted ears, a stubby tail, and big snowshoe feet. They’re a northern forest cat,
about the size of a cocker spaniel. Lynx range across much of Canada and Alaska, but
historically they were found in the Great Lakes region as well. Lynx are loners and range a huge
territory. They seem to follow their favorite prey, snowshoe hare, and recently, Minnesota’s
Superior National Forest has been jumping with hares.


“It doesn’t matter where snowshoe hares are. If they’re there, that’s where cats are going to be.”


University of Minnesota Researcher, Chris Burdette, has one possible explanation for the return
of Canada Lynx.


“There’s a lot of snowshoe hares in this part of the area, and up to 90% of a lynx’s diet is
snowshoe hares.”


Hare populations boom and bust in about seven-year cycles. But in recent population booms, the
lynx were missing. By the mid-1990s, lynx were considered gone from Minnesota, until now.
Three years ago, the cats were spotted again in the region.


Burdette has just begun to count and track northeast Minnesota’s lynx. Two cats have been fitted
with radio collars. It’s not yet clear how many others are wandering the forest. And Burdette
says, lynx do wander.


“It’s very likely that the majority of these animals migrated from Canada. These animals innately
want to disperse long distances.”


Burdette was checking his traps recently, marching through dense balsam fir and the last
remnants of spring snow.


(walking through snow)


His lynx traps are chicken wire boxes, the size of a big dog house, with a bit of hare or beaver in
the back and a door on the front poised to slap shut. But on this day, there were no lynx to be
found.


“It seems like it’s been in there. We cover it up with some balsam, spruce, pine
boughs – whatever we have to sort of make it look more natural. So this one looks clear.”


Lynx were added to the list of threatened species three years ago. An environmental group sued
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, saying the agency’s recovery plans overlooked lynx
populations in the Western Great Lakes, Maine and the Southern Rockies.


Mike Leahy, Counsel for Defenders of Wildlife, says it’s clear there are lynx in the Great Lakes
Region.


“The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources had for a long time vehemently denied that
there could possibly be more than one or two lynx in the entire state, and, they found indeed,
there’s a resident population of lynx in Minnesota.”


Lynx aren’t entirely welcomed. Some residents worry that rules protecting the threatened species
might stop timber sales, or close roads and recreation trails. They remember the Pacific
Northwest, where logging was stopped for spotted owls. But that won’t happen for lynx,
according to Superior National Forest Biologist, Ed Lindquist.


“It’s certainly not a four-legged spotted owl. It really likes regenerating forest – dense
regenerating forest – that provides good snowshoe hare habitat.”


And regenerating forest is what you get after harvesting timber. New aspen growth attracts hares.
Lynx also need older growth nearby for shelter.


Chris Burdette’s study will help create a lynx recovery plan. But he says recovery – actually
getting the cat off federal protection – isn’t even on the horizon.


“No where near it. Very preliminary stages. We’re just in the data collection stage right now, so we
can put some kind of scientific thoughts into the process of managing this species.


There’s little known about the elusive cat or it’s prey. Understanding snowshoe hares will help
researchers understand the lynx.


“Are they going to be here in three years? Are they going to be here in five years, or whatever?
That’s a very open question.”


Burdette will trap lynx until bears begin raiding the bait in his box traps. Then he’ll radio track
collared lynx and monitor hare feeding areas for signs of lynx. The lynx study is funded for three
years, but it might take ten to begin understanding this rare cat.


For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Electrical Charges Zap Pollution

  • A worker samples polluted mud in a test pit. Researchers are trying to break down contaminants in the mud using electrical charges. A German company developed the technology, which U.S. officials hope will be cheaper than dredging polluted sediments. Photo courtesy of MPR.

One of the biggest challenges facing Great Lakes water quality comes from polluted harbors. Scores of underwater sites have been identified, but cleanup has been painfully slow. Now, some people are taking a new approach – they’re using an electrical charge to clean up pollutants. It’s the first test in this country of the system. Supporters say it’s cheaper and faster than conventional methods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:

Transcript

One of the biggest challenges facing Great Lakes water quality comes from
polluted harbors. Scores of underwater sites have been identified, but
cleanup has been painfully slow. Now, some people are taking a new
approach – they’re using an electrical charge to clean up pollutants. It’s
the first test in this country of the system. Supporters say it’s cheaper
and faster than conventional methods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Bob Kelleher reports:


Stryker Bay is a lovely little cove alongside the St. Louis River, near Lake
Superior, in Duluth, Minnesota. It’s a gentle water with ducks in the
summer; and a shady hiking path along the shore.


Tim Leland lives along the shore. From his home, he sees waterfowl, and
fouled water.


“Stryker Bay is a shallow bay. It’s six foot at the most of water.
But there’s a silt that’s underneath it, and all this tar and stuff that’s
coming up. Summertime there we do have a lot of oil that makes the surface
there.”


The bottom of Stryker Bay is a biological time bomb. Under the sand, are
pools of oily stuff – that experts call polynuclear aromatic-hydrocarbons,
or PAH’s. For nearly a century, Stryker Bay was an industrial sewer. PAH’s
were first identified under the bay in the 1970’s. That tar like stuff is
still there. There’s not enough money and little agreement how to get rid
of it.


But what if you could make pollution go away by throwing a switch? That’s
essentially what a German based company promises. And U.S. officials are
listening. The first underwater test in the United States of
Electrochemical-GeoOxidation treatment is underway in Duluth. And early
results show promise. It’s a simple concept, according to Ken Whittle with
Electro Petroleum Inc., who describes the process underway behind him in a
pair of water-filled pits.


“It’s a pretty simple kind of thing. If you want to look at it;
if you have a battery charger at home, you plug the battery charger in, you
take the two leads and you connect them to the terminals on a battery. Well,
that’s pretty analogous to what’s going on here.”


Each pit is filled with polluted mud and covered with water. Metal pipes
are sunken into the muck. In one pit, a carefully controlled electrical
charge pushes electrons through the sediment between the pipes. It’s
supposed to break the electron bonds of dangerous molecules; like PAH’s.
What’s left is harmless – like carbon and water.


The test is financed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers: the agency responsible for dredging shipping lanes.
Dealing with polluted sediment is a huge expense, according to Army Corps
researcher Tommy Myers.


“It’s a real big problem for us to dispose of that material. We
can’t put it back into the water. And, typically, we confine it in what we
call a confined disposal facility, and just store the material into
perpetuity and let it break down by natural processes, if it will.”


Officials would rather destroy pollutants than store them, but conventional
methods are expensive, smelly, and noisy. And they all require dredging,
and that’s expensive.


“In this particular technology, it wouldn’t necessarily require
dredging. There’s very little noise or gaseous emissions associated with
it. The main thing is it could be applied in situ; that means in the water,
without having to dredge.”


Proponents say Electrochemical-GeoOxidation is a bargain. Pollution
officials say conventional methods might cost as much as 200 dollars to
clean up a single cubic yard of sediment from Stryker Bay. But, according
to David Bowman with the Army Corps of Engineers in Detroit, electrical
cleanup might cost a quarter of that.


“Our goal with this project was to find a technology that would
work for around one hundred dollars per cubic yard. The vendor talked about
that they might be able to treat material for around forty five to fifty
dollars per cubic yard at Duluth Harbor.”


And the contractor claims the process works fast. A typical site can be
cleaned in just a few months. It’s also supposed to work on metals, like
mercury, which attach to the electrodes, which can then be disposed of in a
hazardous waste facility.


In the Duluth test, PAH’s have decreased by forty five percent in about a
month. That’s promising, although far from conclusive. The process
won’t get every molecule, but it’s intended to reduce contaminants below
dangerous levels.


Tests began in Duluth this summer, but results are several months away.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Forests in the Age of Global Warming

  • U.S. Forest Service researcher Mark Kubiske examines damage to trees that have been exposed to high levels of ozone.

Scientists are growing trees in a Northern Wisconsin forest – in a bath of greenhouse gasses. There’s a theory that forests can help limit the predicted increase in world temperatures from global warming… and its dire consequences. But early results suggest that Great Lakes forests might struggle to survive the century; doing little to help survival of the planet. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher has more:

Transcript

Scientists are growing trees in a Northern Wisconsin forest – in
a bath of greenhouse gasses. There’s a theory that forests can help limit
the predicted increase in world temperatures from global warming… and
its dire consequences. But early results suggest that Great Lakes forests
might struggle to survive the century; doing little to help survival of the
planet. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher has more:


On a research plantation near Rhinelander Wisconsin, some twelve thousand
trees are planted in wide rings. It’s called the Aspen FACE project …for
Free Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment.


Some trees are growing in high concentrations of carbon dioxide .. a gas
that’s building in the world’s atmosphere, and considered a leading cause
of global warming. Others in elevated ozone … another global warming
pollutant closely associated with auto exhaust.


Dave Karnosky Directs the aspen FACE project from the Michigan
Technological University in Houghton, Michigan.


There’s still debate over carbon dioxide’s role in global warming. But
Karnosky says there’s no denying the upward trend in temperatures, and the
potential consequences.


“Things like glaciers melting on the North Pole, and sea level
increasing; violent storms, increased frequency of violent storms;
increased temperatures which will change the native range of plant
communities and forestry communities.”


There’s more than fifty studies underway here, from Institutions like the
Universities of Illinois and Wisconsin – even the Canadian Forest Service.


The main focus is to find whether forests might absorb significant amounts
of carbon. Holding carbon out of the atmosphere could help keep global
warming from spiraling out of control. If that’s the case, forests could
be used like a sponge to soak up CO2 generated by cars and industries.


But Karnosky’s a forestry expert. He wants to know how elevated carbon and
ozone might affect the region’s trees.


“Will these forests remain as productive in the future? Will
they be more productive, or less? So, we talk about these as being sort of
a window into the future. We like to think of our site as what the future
climate will be, say in the year 2050.”


The research site is eerily reminiscent of the ancient stonehenge ruins in
England.


Each ring is one hundred feet across. The trees are head high, surrounded
by a monument of pipes which rise straight up maybe ten feet higher, and
connect across the tops. A central computer directs high pressure jets of
gas.


Forest Service Biologist Mark Kubiske says early results are surprising.


Trees growing in a high concentration of carbon dioxide do well. Carbon
dioxide is to a plant what oxygen is to an animal. But CO2 isn’t the only
pollutant on the increase. There’s others, like ozone.


In the nearby computer shack, Kubiske says trees grown in ozone pollution
do poorly. Some aspen strains in ozone won’t make it ten years.


“The very sensitive clones are starting to drop out of the experiment; they’re dying
early. And the less sensitive clones are tending to take over the site. So, the effect
of the gasses on the composition of the forests that we’re investigating, is altering the way the different species and the different clones seem to interact.”


Combine ozone and carbon dioxide, and you find that any benefit trees get
from extra CO2 seems to be offset by the damaging effects of ozone.


(ambient sound)


Bill Mattson is a Forest Service entomologist. Mattson says trees grown in
ozone get attacked by insects and fungus at a much higher rate. They also suffer
from animals and birds.


“We’ve noticed that hares and rabbits, for example. They seem to
respond to the smaller plants in a community, and so they start attacking
smaller trees. You’ll see lots of woodpecker injury; lots of sapsucker
injury on those slower growing ozone trees.”


The ozone trees are riddled with small holes from wood boring beetles.


“So if you add those two chemicals together; it somehow is
enhancing the success of the beetles that bore into the stems of these
trees. That was something which I hadn’t expected.”


There’s evidence water moves differently through a tree under the gaseous
conditions. Some trees have elevated tannins in leaves but reductions in
other chemicals. That can have consequences on an ecosystem level, to the
animals and insects that feed on trees.


It might be hard to sustain forestry here in just fifty years. Aspen Face
is a relatively small, controlled experiment; but Mattson says the real
world is a giant experiment with no controls.


“It’s something to be watched very carefully, because we don’t know what the
ultimate consequences will be as we continue to ratchet up
ozone and CO2.”


There’s a dozen similar experiments worldwide. Each treats plants with CO2
and other predicted factors like high temperatures or drought. There’s more
than forestry at stake. There’s a real risk to world food production. If
forests can’t lock up carbon, there may have to be new restrictions on the
sources of carbon … the cars and industries burning fossil fuels.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.

Energy Plan Calls on ‘Clean Coal’ Technology

  • Coal mines, such as this one in Pennsylvania, may become more active with the government's push to develop what's being called 'clean coal technology'. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The U.S. Senate is taking up a long awaited national energy bill. Like a House version passed last year, the Senate is expected to support continued research and development into what’s called “clean coal technology.” Two Northeast Minnesota power plant proposals are based on the new technology, but some environmental groups say there’s no such thing as clean coal; especially at the edge of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher has more:

Transcript

The

U.S. Senate is taking up a long awaited national energy bill. Like a House version passed last year, the Senate is expected to support continued research and development into what’s called “clean coal technology.” Two Northeast Minnesota power plant proposals are based on the new technology. But some environmental groups say there’s no such thing as clean coal – especially at the edge of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports from Duluth:

When you flip on the lights in the Great Lakes region, chances are the source of your electricity is coal. Eighty three percent of Michigan’s electrical power is from coal, eighty six percent in Ohio, and ninety four percent in Indiana. But coal plant emissions are blamed for much of the environmental degradation around the lakes. Airborne mercury, sulfur and nitrogen compounds are blamed for acidic lakes; stunted trees, and poisoned fish and wildlife.

However, despite this dismal legacy, power generation using coal is once again becoming a growth industry. That’s because, in part, coal is abundant and inexpensive…

“The United States has approximately five hundred and fifty billion tons of coal reserves, which makes our country the Saudi Arabia of coal.”

Tom Sarkus directs the Coal Power Project Division at the National Research Laboratory in Pittsburgh – part of the government’s clean coal research project.

“And despite its reputation, coal is becoming increasingly clean, in terms of air emissions.”

Coal plays a major role in the Bush Administration’s energy plan. If enacted, the federal government would pump more than 3-billion dollars into so called clean coal technology over ten years. Senate democrats support the technology but at about half that level

One of those technologies is called coal gasification. Coal isn’t burned directly – it’s converted, using steam and high pressure, into a burnable gas. That gas is then used to produce energy. In Minnesota, plans are underway to build what could be the world’s largest coal gasification power plant. A two-thousand megawatt generator would be built on property already scarred by decades of iron mining. The plant’s fate likely rests with a new energy bill.

Meanwhile, just seventy miles away, another technology is being used to produce steam for a paper plant and electricity for the public. Coal and wastewood is suspended in a jet of air for a more complete burn. Rapids Energy expects nearly complete control of both nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxides – major components of acid rain.

To some observers the return to coal is odd – it’s been the target of environmentalists for years.

Mike Murray is an Environmental Scientist with the National Wildlife Federation in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He worries about mercury found in at least trace amounts in most coal. It’s extremely toxic and hard to get rid of.

“Mercury contamination is a major cause of fish advisories around the country now, with forty one states having some type of mercury fish advisory in place. In fact, it’s the major cause of fish advisory by far.”

There’s promising technology to help control mercury emissions. Filter systems called scrubbers might pull mercury from a plant’s exhaust plume. And, in a gasification plant, mercury might be trapped in carbon injected into the gas stream. But so far, neither technology is proven one hundred percent effective.

Jane Reyer is a member of the Lake Superior Bi-National Forum. The Forum works to honor an agreement between the United States and Canada to end all emissions of nine toxic chemicals – including mercury, from the Lake Superior basin. A renewed push to coal-based industry appears to fly in the face of their efforts.

“It seems that that message has not gotten across to decision makers in other areas of the government. For instance, the Department of Energy that is putting a lot emphasis on clean coal technology probably has never heard of the Lake Superior Bi-National Program.”

And there’s another bugaboo with coal. Anna Aurilio, with the Washington based U.S. Public Interest Research Group, says there’s no such thing as clean coal.

“Burning coal releases carbon dioxide, which is the pollutant that is building up in the atmosphere, and which acts like a blanket; trapping the earth’s heat; and which is causing global warming.”

Global warming could cause dramatic changes in weather and rising sea levels. Environmentalists say coal produces one third of the nation’s CO2 emissions.

The higher efficiency of clean coal plants should reduce the amount of CO2 released for a given amount of electricity.

But that’s not good enough, according to Aurilio, who supports non-polluting technology like wind.

“We have the technology in this country, to reduce our dependence on foreign oil; to reduce energy related pollution, and to save consumers money, by increasing energy efficiency, and to shift to truly clean energy sources.”

The tide may be behind coal. But the momentum of that tide will be measured over the next few weeks.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.