The Microcystis bloom on Maumee Bay (August 19, 2003). The bloom stretches eastward for 25 miles. (Enhanced Landsat 5 natural color image by T. Bridgeman, Lake Erie Center - U. Toledo)
A mysterious bloom of algae in Lake Erie is puzzling scientists and threatening a Great Lakes fishery. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
A mysterious bloom of algae in Lake Erie is puzzling scientists and threatening a Great Lakes
fishery. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Recent satellite photos show a vast green mat floating about ten miles off Maumee Bay near
Toledo. Bob Heath, a limnologist at Kent State University, says the bloom is a strain of
microcystis, a toxic blue-green algae. It’s been recurring almost every year since 1995 and
showed up in Lake Huron, Saginaw Bay in 1997. Heath says it’s caused by too much
phosphorus, but he says researchers aren’t sure of the source.
“The Great Lakes are really in a very fluid state and they’re a very fragile ecosystem. And we
need to be mindful of all of the possible things that could assault the health of, especially of Lake
Erie.”
Heath says zebra mussels and other grazers won’t eat the algae, so it’s out-competes other food
sources, resulting in fewer sport fish. It can also poison fish and waterfowl and lend drinking
water an earthy taste.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
The Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus
mosquito - one of the mosquitoes responsible for the transmission of West Nile virus. (Photo courtesy of the USGS.)
Some health experts and politicians are struggling with balancing the risk of West Nile virus with the perceived hazards associated with spraying insecticides to kill the mosquitoes carrying the virus. The big question is – to spray or not to spray? Last year… public health officials in many communities decided to spray pesticides on adult mosquitoes, hoping to reduce the chance of West Nile virus infection in humans. But spraying was met by a public outcry from some residents concerned about the immediate and possible long-term health effects of the chemicals. This year, some health departments have chosen to focus their control efforts on killing mosquito larvae before they hatch with chemicals that are relatively benign. Others still plan to spray. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
Some health experts and politicians are struggling with balancing the
risk of West Nile virus with the perceived hazards associated with spraying
insecticides to kill the mosquitoes carrying the virus. The big question is –
to spray or not to spray? Last year… public health officials in many
communities decided to spray pesticides on adult mosquitoes, hoping to reduce
the chance of West Nile virus infection in humans. But spraying was met by a
public outcry from some residents concerned about the immediate and possible
long-term health effects of the chemicals. This year, some health departments
have chosen to focus their control efforts on killing mosquito larvae before
they hatch with chemicals that are relatively benign. Others still plan to
spray. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Last year there were more than 4,000 reported cases of West Nile virus
in the United States. The virus hit some Great Lakes states especially
hard. In Ohio, in Cuyahoga County – which surrounds Cleveland – 211 cases
were confirmed and 14 people died. The County’s health district decided to
do a sero-survey, taking blood samples from about 1200 residents to
find out just how many people actually got West Nile virus without noticing
any symptoms. Assistant Administrator Terry Allen says the results were
surprising.
“We found that between four and about six and a half-percent of
residents were exposed to West Nile virus. That equates to perhaps 50 to
80,000 people in Cuyahoga County that were exposed last year.”
Allen concedes that one way of looking at those figures is to see that the
number of deaths in the infected population was extremely low. But Allen is
concerned that a new outbreak of West Nile could infect thousands of people
who weren’t exposed last year and could cause even more deaths. So he says
the county has decided to take all possible precautions – including spraying
a pesticide on adult mosquitoes in areas where human cases are reported.
“You have to put this in context. Most counties in Ohio do not
spray for mosquito control.”
That’s Barry Zucker, president of the Ohio Coalition Against the Misuse of
Pesticides. He’s one of many county residents who oppose spraying.
“What the doctors tell us and what the medical studies tell us
is that there are real and potential health consequences from pesticides –
everything from upper respiratory diseases to possible neurological damage
to possible increase in breast cancer. The bottom line is that the pesticide
spraying for adult mosquitoes does not work.”
Others have come to the same conclusion. Bill Tomko is president of the
village council of the Cleveland suburb of Chagrin Falls.
“Our concerns relative to the county board of health was they
didn’t really have any data that indicated that the spraying would do any
good. And we became quite concerned that it was being done to have the
appearance of action in order to quell the emotional response of, you
know, ‘Do something, protect me.'”
Tomko say his community is one of many in the region that have decided not
to spray.
“My first reaction is just to extrapolate from the medical
profession when you’re looking at spraying versus not spraying, first do no
harm. The better way to do it is to apply individual protection
measures and to go after the breeding of the mosquitoes themselves, which is
what we adopted to do in Chagrin Falls by adopting a larvacide program.”
Tomko says his community will pepper catch basins and areas of standing
water with a chemical briquette that kills only mosquito larvae. Combined
with a reduction of breeding sites like removing old tires, continued
surveillance, and a public information campaign about the need for personal
protection, Tomko hopes to keep residents safe from infection by West Nile
virus. Last year, no one in Chagrin Falls got sick.
But Cuyahoga County Health Director Tim Horgan says, with the high infection rate seen
last year in urban areas, he just can’t take that risk. So in addition to larvacide,
surveillance, and all the rest, he says the county will use pesticide sprays
if conditions warrant. Health Director Horgan warns that even residents on
the county’s no-spray list could see pesticide spraying in their
neighborhoods this summer.
“With the problems we had last year, we might have areas where’s
there’s a number of houses on an individual street where people would rather not be
sprayed. And then we might have a case or two of human disease right in that area. If
that happens to us this year, we’re going to notify people on the list, let them
know we’re going to be there. But I think we’re going to try to go in and
make sure that area gets sprayed and that’s very consistent with the
recommendations of the CDC.”
But even the head of the Centers for Disease Control admits there’s not
enough good scientific evidence to be sure spraying works. So while some
health districts such as Cuyahoga County and the city of Cleveland plan to
spray, Chagrin Falls and many other communities do not. What all health
officials do agree on is that avoiding getting bitten is the best way to
keep West Nile at bay.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer in Cleveland.
The Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus
mosquito - one of the mosquitoes responsible for the transmission of West Nile virus. (Photo courtesy of the USGS.)
With the return of West Nile virus season, communities around the Great Lakes region are debating the health risks of spraying pesticides to kill adult mosquitoes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
With the return of West Nile virus season, communities around the Great Lakes region
are debating the health risks of spraying pesticides to kill adult mosquitoes. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Last year more than 170 people in Great Lakes states died after contracting West Nile
virus. Many health districts, citing guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control, are
spraying pesticides in the hope of reducing the number of infected mosquitoes. But many
residents are worried about the health risks of pesticide sprays. CDC director Dr. Julie
Gerberding says there’s not enough scientific evidence to show that spraying reduces
human West Nile cases.
“The evidence that adulticide pesticides will reduce mosquitoes in a given geographic
area is pretty strong. The question is whether
or not that results in a reduction in disease transmission to people.”
Dr. Gerberding says her agency considers spraying a last resort. She says a better way to
reduce West Nile infection is to use more benign chemicals that kill mosquito larvae
before they hatch.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
Urban sprawl is affecting communities across the Great Lakes region. In one Ohio community, residents are turning to their churches to fight back. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
Urban sprawl is affecting communities across the Great Lakes region. In one Ohio community,
residents are turning to their churches to fight back. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen
Schaefer reports:
Forest Hill Presbyterian Church was built in Cleveland Heights 100 years ago. Pastor John Lentz
says, in its heyday, some 15-hundred people regularly walked to church services every week.
Today, the congregation totals just 600. Lentz says it’s a constant struggle to replace those who
leave his flock for the greenfield developments that surround the urban center.
“Churches are anchors of communities and I think we need to be active in the kinds of issues that
affect our communities, like fair and open housing and education, and really make it our mission to equip
faithful people to, you know, walk the walk.”
He and other religious leaders have banded together to form the Northeast Ohio Alliance for
Hope. The group is working with 15 Cleveland suburbs, taking on issues like predatory lending,
school funding, and home repair.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
In the 1970’s, Cleveland was the poster child for industrial pollution. Today, this rust-belt city will soon become home to the nation’s first gas station that will sell clean-burning hydrogen fuel. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
In the 1970’s, Cleveland was the poster child for industrial pollution. Today, this
rust-belt city will soon become home to the nation’s first gas station that will sell
clean-burning hydrogen fuel. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer
reports.
The public hydrogen fueling station will open in two years off of the Ohio Turnpike. It
will cater to cars that are powered by fuels cells. These cars are still in development, and
have yet to make it to dealer showrooms. But Clean Cities Coordinator Stephanie Strong
says building the new station will demonstrate that a hydrogen infrastructure is possible.
“There’s been a problem up ’til now with alternative fuels, either the availability of the
fueling infrastructure or the availability of the vehicles. It’s been a chicken and egg
syndrome.”
The project is being funded as part of Ohio Governor Bob Taft’s 100-million dollar
initiative to boost high-tech industry in the state. The new station won’t sell soda and
cigarettes, but it will have a learning center promoting new vehicle technologies. The
complex itself will be powered by a fuel cell, the kind that may eventually power people’s
homes.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
Many states across the country are slashing their budgets for the second year in a row. And this year, some Midwest states are making cuts in their fish advisory programs. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports, Ohio could be the first state in the region to eliminate its fish advisory program altogether:
Transcript
Many states across the country are slashing their budgets for the
second year in a row. And this year, some Midwest states
are making cuts in their fish advisory programs. As the Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports, Ohio could be the first state
in the region to eliminate its fish advisory program altogether:
The state says it will have to cut the ten-year old program that informs
Ohioans about the safety of eating fish caught in local waters. Jay Carey
is a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Health, which works with two other
state agencies to produce the annual fish advisories. Carey says state
budget cuts left the health department with no resources to continue the
program. But he says there may yet be a way to keep the advisories intact.
“The Ohio Department of Health is going to be meeting with the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources
before the next budget cycle to see if there’s another way we can fund our
health assessment portion of the fish advisory program.”
In addition to providing people with essential health information, fish
tissue testing also gives policymakers important water quality data. Other
states like Michigan have already cut back their programs in response to
budget cuts, but so far none has been eliminated.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
Back in the 1970’s, Lake Erie was considered dead. Too many nutrients were flowing into the lake, causing algae blooms that used up the oxygen. Massive fish kills were one result. Until recently, scientists thought they had the problem licked. But a few years ago, researchers began to realize those conditions were returning. Zebra mussels could be one culprit, but scientists aren’t sure. So the U-S EPA has launched a research ship to gather data that might help to unravel the mystery. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
Back in the 1970’s, Lake Erie was considered dead. Too many
nutrients were flowing into the lake, causing algae blooms that used up
the oxygen. Massive fish kills were one result. Until recently, scientists
thought they had the problem licked. But a few years ago, researchers
began to realize those conditions were returning. Zebra mussels could
be one culprit, but scientists aren’t sure. So the U.S. EPA has launched a
research ship to gather data that might help to unravel the mystery. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
For years, scientists believed the water quality of Lake Erie was steadily
improving, thanks in large part to a discovery made in the 1970’s. That’s
when researchers discovered that too much of the nutrient phosphorus was
making its way into the lake from farm fertilizers, sewage treatment plants,
and cleaning agents. The extra nutrients fed toxic blue-green algae blooms
that – in summer – often used up all the oxygen in the colder water at the
bottom of the lake, creating anoxic – or ‘dead’ – zones. New limits were
set on how much phosphorus could be discharged into Erie and other Great
Lakes and millions of dollars were spent to improve wastewater treatment
systems. By the 1990’s it was clear that efforts to reduce phosphorus loads
had been successful and until recently scientists believed that dead zones
were a thing of the past. But a few years ago, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency began to observe that levels of phosphorus were once again
rising, even though the same amount of the nutrient was entering the lake.
“And then in 1995, there was a big bloom of toxic blue-green algae
again. The increased phosphorus in the lake was a surprise and it
corresponds to the bloom of the blue-green algae.”
Dave Culver is a biologist with Ohio State University who’s been studying
Lake Erie since 1977. He says last summer a new dead zone appeared in the
lake’s central basin. In looking for the cause of the unexpected changes,
Culver and other researchers are turning their suspicions to Lake Erie’s
most recent immigrant – the zebra mussel.
“One of the possibilities is that zebra mussels are processing
organic matter and instead of allowing the phosphorus to settle out in the
sediments, they squirt it out their excurrent siphon up into the water
column where it can then used over and over and over again.”
Zebra mussels invaded the Great Lakes in the late 1980’s and spread rapidly.
But Culver believes zebra mussels may be just one of many possible sources
for the recent changes. He says it could be anything from farm run-off to
political policies.
“The questions is, given that we observe an increase, what are the
relative roles of external loading, internal recycling by zebra mussels,
changing water levels, global warming, a Republican governor… I don’t know
what all these things are.”
This summer Culver and some 30 other scientists from the U.S. and Canada
will be working to gather new data they hope will help solve the mystery.
It’s one of the biggest research investigations the U.S. EPA has launched in
the Great Lakes. The agency has brought in its research ship, the 180-foot
Lake Guardian. It’s equipped as a floating laboratory and scientists will
work and live on board, gathering samples of water, plankton and other
material from the lake’s Central Basin. On the back deck of the ship one
crew is working with Niagra University biologist Bill Edwards to program a
probe that will measure minute changes in water temperature.
“That’ll give us all kinds of information about what the transport
of things like the phosphorus and the oxygen and those things that the EPA
is very concerned about.”
What researchers find out this summer could have implications far beyond
Lake Erie. Zebra mussels are now well-established throughout the Great
Lakes. They’re also been found in the Mississippi and, most recently, in
the Tennessee River. Meredith Carr is a graduate student in engineering
studying fluid mechanics at the University of Illinois.
“One of the rivers we’re studying is the Illinois River of Lake Michigan, which
is another one of the Great Lakes. It serves as a source to
allow zebra mussel larva into the river, so understanding better what
happens in the lake, we can understand better what happens in the river.”
But finding out what’s happening in Lake Erie might not solve the problem.
If zebra mussels are the chief culprit, it might be difficult, even
impossible, to reduce manmade sources of phosphorus enough to restore a
healthy lake.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
NASA has begun decommissioning its only nuclear reactor test facility in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer has more:
Transcript
NASA has begun decommissioning its only nuclear reactor test facility
in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer has more:
The Plum Brook Test Reactor near Sandusky, Ohio was designed to study the
effects of radiation on materials used in space flight. It operated for 11
years and was shut down in 1973 after NASA decided not to pursue manned
flights to Mars. The two reactors at the site will both be removed and
sent to low-level waste disposal facilities in North Carolina and Utah.
Keith Peecook is NASA Plum Brook’s Senior Project Engineer. He says the
agency chose to clean up the site to the highest level of safety.
“A family could take up residence on this site – could live on the site – raising their crops – drinking the groundwater, and the level of exposure that would result from the past history of the site would still not represent a health risk to them.”
De-commissioning should be complete by 2007. The Plum Brook test reactor
cost about 15-million dollars to build. It will cost almost 165-million
dollars to demolish.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer.
Two years ago, Oberlin College opened a new building that’s a radical departure from typical classroom architecture. Designed as a living laboratory of energy-efficiency and sustainable building techniques, the Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies has been turning heads ever since. The building has won two national awards for its innovative design, which features a rooftop solar array and a biological wastewater treatment system. But one man – himself an Oberlin College professor – says the Lewis Center’s design is seriously flawed. He says the building can’t deliver on its promise of high performance. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
Transcript
Two years ago, Oberlin College opened a new building that’s a radical departure from typical classroom architecture. Designed as a living laboratory of energy-efficiency and sustainable building techniques, the Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies has been turning heads ever since. The building has won two national awards for its innovative design, which features a rooftop solar array and a biological wastewater
treatment system. But one man – himself an Oberlin College professor – says
the Lewis Center’s design is seriously flawed. He says the building can’t deliver on its promise of high performance. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer reports:
The Lewis Environmental Studies Center at Oberlin College is not your average college building. The curved roof of the building – designed by architect William McDonough – holds a massive array of solar panels that soak up the sun’s energy and convert it to electricity for heat and light. Instead of sending wastewater to the local sewage plant, the building has its own on-site treatment facility that uses biological components – called
a “living machine” – for final cleansing. Outside, a small wetland recreates the natural ecosystem on which Oberlin was built. Even the building’s materials were made from sustainable resources designed to have little or no impact on the environment or human health. None of it is cutting-edge technology. But the Lewis Center does integrate multiple ecological-design concepts that work together to make it environmentally-friendly. It’s one of just a handful of so-called high-performance buildings now beginning to dot the American landscape. In addition, it’s a building that was designed to evolve as new technologies came along. It’s no wonder Professor David Orr, the building’s originator, claimed bragging rights even before the Center opened.
“This is a building that purifies its own wastewater, powers itself by
sunlight, has eliminated toxic chemicals and compounds.”
But one man takes issue with the high-performance claims the building’s
creators have made. John Scofield is also an Oberlin professor. He teaches
in the physics department and focuses his research on solar energy.
Scofield says even before the Center was built, it was clear the building’s
basic design was flawed.
“The architect has said on several occasions that the building is designed to generate more energy than it uses and I don’t believe that’s correct.”
Scofield’s primary critique is of the building’s energy systems, particularly those devoted to heating and cooling. He says there’s a real disconnect between what the designers claim the building can accomplish and the way it’s actually performing.
“Well, I think first of all, that the building springs out of some wonderful ideas and I very much support the design intent for the building. No, my concern has been, I think, false hopes. The promises for the building and the way that it was sold were I think not really in line with the reality of the building for a long time.”
(Peterson) “I think one thing you have to consider is the difference between a long-term goal and short-term performance.”
John Peterson is a professor in the environmental studies program. He
oversees the Center’s day-to-day functions.
“I mean, I think where we are right now is in a good spot right now. I think we can take a lot of pride in how the building is performing right now. This last year, for instance, we exported a fair amount of energy onto the grid. We also imported a lot of energy onto the grid, but on balance, we produced 53-percent of the energy that was consumed in the
building.”
Peterson admits there were some design flaws in the Lewis Center’s heating system when it was first put on line. The college has just replaced a high-energy consumption electric boiler with a more energy-efficient heat pump, which is the building’s primary source of heat. Last year, slightly more than half the building’s energy consumption went to heating during what proved to be a relatively mild winter. Even though the net energy use was 37-percent better than other Oberlin campus buildings, the college has
called on the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for help in improving the
system. Paul Torsellini is a senior engineer with the Lab’s High-Performance Building Group in Golden, Colorado. He says, considering it’s a building designed to push the outside of the envelope, the Lewis Center is performing well.
“There are certainly issues with that building, as well as any other building that we build today. You know, one of the things with building engineering, which is, you know, a little different than, say, building a car. You build a car and you build lots of them. As opposed to buildings where, every time you build a building, it’s basically a custom
application.”
And so each building comes with unique problems. The High-Performance Group team is expert in innovative building design. Torsellini says over the next few months, he’ll be evaluating exactly how well the energy components of the Lewis Center perform, monitoring both the energy that’s being created and the energy that’s being used by the building’s different systems. Along with Torsellini, critic John Scofield believes the building can eventually make good on its promise to produce more energy than it uses.
“There’s a great case now for net energy exporters called the space station. So if cost is no object, it’s not a problem making a net energy exporter.”
Torsellini says it all comes down to how you measure success.
“You know, somewhere on the order of 40, 50-percent of the energy comes off the roof of that building. What other building in Oberlin or in the state of Ohio even comes close to thinking about that?”
More hard data will be needed to calculate the Lewis Center’s overall performance. Everyone is looking forward to a scientific peer review process that should help clarify the building’s performance achievements. But even if it’s not exactly perfect, both supporters and critics of the Lewis Environmental Studies Center hope the building will prove to be a good investment in scientific and educational research.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer in Oberlin.
When NAFTA was passed in 1994, environmentalists feared catastrophic results. Polluting industries would move to Mexico, where environmental protections hadn’t caught up with those in the U.S. and Canada. They were worried that air pollution would increase as more goods were shipped across international borders, and they were concerned that shared resources like the Great Lakes might lose their protected status and become commodities subject to trade. Supporters of NAFTA argued that increased prosperity would lead to improved pollution technology and a strengthening of environmental protections. But eight years later, the effects of NAFTA on the environment appear to be mixed. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer explains why:
Transcript
When NAFTA was passed in 1994, environmentalists feared catastrophic results. Polluting industries would move to Mexico, where environmental
protections hadn’t caught up with those in the U.S. and Canada. They were worried that air pollution would increase as more goods were
shipped across international borders. And they were concerned that shared resources like the Great Lakes might lose their protected status and become commodities subject to trade. Supporters of NAFTA argued that increased prosperity would lead to improved pollution technology and a strengthening of environmental protections. But eight years later, the effects of NAFTA on the environment appear to be mixed. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Schaefer explains why:
Two years ago, a private Canadian company got permission from a provincial government to ship water from Lake Huron to water-starved countries in Southeast Asia. When the federal government got wind of the deal, the contract was revoked. But environmentalists feared that
another assault on Great Lakes water could arise under a provision of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Chapter 11 is a clause that allows private foreign investors to sue local governments if they believe their trade rights have been violated. In the case of Great Lakes water, that could mean that trade laws could trump environmental regulations – and that businesses could overturn a government’s ability to protect natural resources and human health.
[ambient sound]
At a recent U.S./Canada law conference held in Cleveland, government officials, policymakers, and trade lawyers gathered to discuss the environmental consequences of Chapter 11 and other trade issues. In the
Great Lakes region, the sharpest impact may have been to air quality.
“Increased freight transportation
linked to NAFTA has led to significant air pollution at border crossings at both borders.”
Jannine Ferretti heads the North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation, an international agency established to address environmental concerns under NAFTA. She admits that as yet, there’s been only limited assessment of those impacts. But she says what data there is, shows it’s not all bad news.
“The Mexico steel, because of NAFTA’s investment provisions, actually enabled Mexico steel to upgrade its technology, making the sector actually in some ways cleaner than that of the United States and Canada. But what about the effects of trade rules on environmental policy? And this is where we go to NAFTA’s Chapter 11.”
(Frank Loy) “Chapter 11 is a chapter designed to protect investors from one NAFTA country that invested in another NAFTA country and it has led to a number of cases that have worried the environmental community.”
Frank Loy served as Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs under the Clinton administration. He says under Chapter 11, a number of private investors have successfully sued foreign governments for millions of dollars, contending that meeting local environmental regulations violated their rights under free trade laws.
“I would say the cases worry me a lot. My guess is
there already is a regulatory chill, a timidity on the part of governments
to take certain actions for fear of subjecting the state to liabilities.”
Part of that regulatory chill may derive from the concern that it’s not an open process. One of the sharpest criticisms of Chapter 11 is that the cases are heard and decided by a closed-door, three-person tribunal, with no mandate to hear testimony from third parties. So while the public has a hard time benefiting from NAFTA, companies have it relatively easy. In one of the first challenges under the provision, U.S.-based Ethyl Corporation won nearly 20-million dollars in damages from the Canadian government for its ban on a gasoline additive called MMT. Canada has since dropped the ban. Another case involved an Ohio company, S.D. Meyers, that treats the chemical compounds known as PCBs.
James McIlroy, a trade lawyer from Toronto, says the company wanted to import the waste from Canada, despite a Canadian prohibition.
“The government of Canada said we are prohibiting this for environmental reasons. But the real reason, when you really looked at it hard, the real reason was there was a PCB plant in Alberta in western Canada that the government of Canada wanted to promote.”
McIlroy is not alone when he says a number of Chapter 11 cases apparently based on environmental protection have proved on closer scrutiny to be a cover-up for government trade protection. While he doesn’t dismiss the environmental issues, he does caution against blowing them out of proportion.
“I think it’s fair to say, whether the cases are valid or not, there sure haven’t been a whole lot of them. And therefore this is not this huge, massive problem that people are talking about. And
we’ve had this what, since 1994, and you can count the number of cases on two
hands.”
Ohio Democrat Congressman Sherrod Brown voted against NAFTA. He disagrees with McIlroy’s assessment.
“Their arguments are specious. Perhaps in the opinion of trade lawyers, these challenges have served as a cloak for protectionism. But to trade lawyers, everything’s seen as a cloak for protectionism.”
Brown says while companies began making use of Chapter 11 only about four years ago, there have been plenty of other trade challenges to environmental laws.
“Time after time after time, both in NAFTA and every public health law challenge under the WTO, 33 straight times, public health laws, environmental laws, and food safety laws, every single time they’ve been struck down. That’s wrong, whenever a trade law can be used to undercut or repeal a democratically-attained rule or regulation.”
Both opponents and supporters agree it’s unlikely NAFTA will be revised anytime soon. But the precedents set under NAFTA could affect future trade agreements. Arguments on both sides of the issue will undoubtedly be aired again as Congress takes up approval of new fast track trade
legislation with similar investor protections this spring. Environmental groups believe equitable settlement of future trade challenges may have to rely on the strength of public opinion to sway government decisions.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Schaefer in Cleveland.
The Microcystis bloom on Maumee Bay (August 19, 2003). The bloom stretches eastward for 25 miles. (Enhanced Landsat 5 natural color image by T. Bridgeman, Lake Erie Center - U. Toledo)
