The government of Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien recently outlined a new long-term political agenda. It includes a proposal for major changes to transportation that would affect traffic bottlenecks at crossing points like the Ambassador Bridge. The Bridge is the biggest trading corridor between Canada and the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Karpenchuk reports:
Transcript
The government of Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien recently outlined a new long-
term political agenda. It includes a proposal for major changes to transportation that
would affect traffic bottlenecks at crossing points like the Ambassador Bridge. The
Bridge is the biggest trading corridor between Canada and the U.S. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Dan Karpenchuk reports:
Prime Minister Jean Chretien calls it part of his Kyoto plan, which is intended to reduce
traffic congestion on the main highway link along the north shore of Lake Ontario all the
way to the U.S. border for almost 24 hours a day that highway looks more like a moving
warehouse as goods travel by truck north and south of the border.
But the emissions from thousands of trucks each day are creating smog from Toronto to
Buffalo to Detroit.
Chretien’s plan is to shift more truck traffic to rail and water.
Ken Ogilvie of the environmental organization, Pollution Probe, says it’s a positive step
but it needs more government incentives similar to those in the U.S.
“What the United States is ahead of us on and should and could do a lot more is on the
policy side of tying some of this funding to make sure there is improved rail and transit
systems.”
Ogilvie says further study would be needed to determine whether the plan would simply
shift environmental problems to the Great Lakes and to rail infrastructure on both sides of
the border.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Dan Karpenchuk in Toronto.
A new coalition of Canadian business groups says their government’s plan to ratify the Kyoto protocol on climate change will destroy the economy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly has the story:
Transcript
A new coalition of Canadian business groups says their government’s plan to ratify the Kyoto
protocol on climate change will destroy the economy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Karen Kelly has the story.
Petroleum producers, steel manufacturers and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce are among
the 25 industry groups who’ve joined together to oppose the treaty. The Kyoto Protocol would
require Canada to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by six percent below 1990-levels over the
next 10 years.
Prime Minister Jean Chretien is calling on parliament to ratify the Kyoto Protocol by the end of
the year, but Thomas D’Aquino of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives says the plan will be
disastrous for industry.
“You can’t say there won’t be any more growth. We won’t build any more plants, we won’t build
any more factories because if you tried to do that, you’d have a revolution on your hands in this
country.
A Canadian government report estimated that the changes required could cost Canada 15-billion
dollars in lost growth and 200,000 jobs. The business leaders say it’ll be even worse.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
A just-released study by two environmental groups has found high levels of arsenic on the surface of pressure-treated wood products. The Environmental Working Group and the Healthy Building Network tested pressure-treated wood purchased from home improvement stores in 13 cities. In releasing their findings, the groups are calling for a ban on the use of the lumber in construction. Their findings add to the growing concern about the safety of the chemicals used to treat this wood. Those chemicals are now being re-evaluated by both the Canadian and American governments. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, the two governments are approaching the issue differently:
Transcript
A just released study by two environmental groups has found high levels of arsenic on the surface of pressure-treated wood products. The Environmental Working Group and the Healthy Building Network tested pressure-treated wood purchased from home improvement stores in 13 cities. In releasing their findings, the groups are calling for a ban on the use of the lumber in construction. Their findings add to the growing concern about the safety of the chemicals used to treat this wood. Those chemicals are now being re-evaluated by both the Canadian and American governments. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, the two governments are approaching the issue differently.
For years, Don Houston at the Canadian Institute of Child Health has been calling for warning labels on pressure-treated wood. The lumber is used in playground structures and picnic tables throughout North America. And it’s treated with a preservative called Chromated Copper Arsenate, which protects the wood from insects and fungi. The preservative is made from arsenic, chromium and copper. And Houston says children who are exposed to the wood may be exposed to those chemicals, as well.
“It’s not just children’s play structures. I’d rather suspect even more problematic is the deck that’s on the back of their house because often times children spend more time there. It’s all sorts of structures that are put in outdoors – decks, balconies, retaining walls; even the telephone pole that might be in a schoolyard might be problematic.”
Houston says the problem arises when arsenic and chromium, which are both carcinogens, remain on the surface of the wood. A study of ten playgrounds conducted by Health Canada in the late 1980’s detected both substances on the surface of play structures made with pressure treated wood. Arsenic and chromium were also found in the nearby soil. Health Canada warns people who work with pressure-treated wood to wear gloves and a mask and to thoroughly wash clothing and exposed skin once they’re finished. The agency also warns against burning pressure treated wood. But Houston says there are still no guidelines for children.
“It doesn’t make a lot of sense for the guy who’s building it to use gloves and then the child ten minutes after it’s built to be walking over it and running on it barefoot and having greater potential health impact from the exposure.”
But scientists at Health Canada say the research findings have been mixed. They point to studies conducted by the U.S. EPA in the late 1980’s that found minimal health risks. Now, fifteen years since they last evaluated these chemicals, both Health Canada and the EPA are taking another look. The update is required by law in both countries. Richard Martin is a toxicologist at Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency. He says the presence of arsenic is not always a cause for concern.
“Although there’s a number of reports out there of arsenic being found in soil, and although they’re useful, arsenic is found in all soil. So we need to go the extra step to determine to what extent there’s potential for exposure to children and that type of thing.”
Martin says his agency is reviewing research to determine the effect of exposure on both adults who work with cca-treated wood and children who play near it. But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking the review a step further. Jim Jones, the deputy director of the EPA’s office of pesticide programs, says they’re concentrating on the exposure to children first.
“It was the children’s exposure through cca-treated wood we think are the most important to look at as they’re the group in the population that is likely to have the greatest exposures, just because of the way in which they interact with playground equipment and on decks.”
The EPA also plans to take soil samples near cca-treated wood structures in 75 playgrounds around the United States. And it’s considering a recommendation that people apply sealants to pressure-treated wood in the interim. The EPA’s scientific advisory panel suggested the agency take that measure. The EPA and Health Canada are collaborating on the re-evaluation – sharing their findings and their recommendations. Don Houston of the Canadian Institute of Child Health hopes that will lead to legislation in both countries that will restrict the use of this lumber in places where children play. The EPA and Health Canada are expected to announce their recommendations next spring.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
More than 1,300 U.S. and Canadian scientists are asking the Canadian government to strengthen proposed legislation that would protect endangered species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly explains:
Transcript
More than 13 hundred U.S. and Canadian scientists are asking the Canadian government to strengthen proposed legislation that would protect endangered species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports.
Right now, endangered species in Canada have no federal protection. The new Species at Risk Act would make it illegal for people to kill the 3 hundred 80 plants and animals considered at risk. But unlike the American law, the proposal does not guarantee that the land or waters in which these animals live will be protected from development. University of Ottawa biology professor David Currie says that’s led to a protest among scientists.
“Virtually all of the studies that have been done on the reasons why species become endangered or go extinct have shown that at least some aspect of habitat loss is involved and in many of the most dramatic cases of extinction, species’ habitats have been simply been entirely wiped out.”
The government’s environment committee will consider amendments to the bill in October. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
A Canadian environmental group is claiming that nuclear waste is leaking from a dump on the shores of Lake Ontario. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Transcript
A Canadian environmental group is claiming that nuclear waste is leaking from a dump on the shores of Lake Ontario. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports.
The Port Granby nuclear waste site sits on a bluff overlooking Lake Ontario just east of Toronto. The environmental group Lake Ontario Keeper collected samples of treated wastewater from the site as well as untreated runoff. They say an independent lab found illegal levels of uranium, arsenic and other chemicals in both samples.
Norm Rubin, the group’s director of nuclear research, says it’s time the government stepped in.
“This stuff is leaking today, it’s toxic today, it’s violating the law today and we’ve waited enough decades already to see something done.”
The Cameco Corporation, which owns the dump, denies the group’s findings.
Officials at Environment Canada say they will review the report. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
After taking more than a year to consider the matter, the U.S. has now responded to a report that said a new sense of urgency is needed to restore and protect the Great Lakes. The report was issued by a binational commission overseeing U.S. and Canadian cooperation on lakes issues. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
After taking more than a year to consider the matter, the U.S. has now responded to a report that said a new sense of urgency is needed to restore and protect the Great Lakes. The report was issued by a bi-national commission, overseeing U.S. and Canadian cooperation on lakes issues. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.
The International Joint Commission monitors whether the two countries are complying with a water quality agreement, when its reports were released in July of last year. The commission warned that every delay in restoring the health of the lakes carried a steep price. Despite that urgency, the U.S. response to the report was delayed, in part because of the change in administrations in the White House. Mark Elster is an analyst with the U.S. EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office. He sums up the U.S. response to the I.J.C. report this way.
“I would say we generally agree with most of their recommendations.”
Yet, the U.S. response says it is unable to clean up contamination and stop invasive species quite as quickly as the I.J.C. calls for, and Elster notes the U.S. has to coordinate many of its plans with Canada.
“So, for those bi-national type recommendations, we’ll be in contact with our Canadian colleagues to see if we’re in agreement in the tenor of our responses.”
The Canadian response, similar to the U.S. response, also took a year to be issued. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
The Supreme Court of Canada recently upheld the right of Canadian municipalities to restrict the use of pesticides within their boundaries. The decision marks the end of a 10 year lawsuit between the town of Hudson, Quebec and two companies – Chemlawn and Spraytech. The companies had sued the town, claiming municipalities did not have the power to control pesticide use. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that Canada’s unique political structure has set a challenging precedent:
Transcript
The Supreme Court of Canada recently upheld the right of Canadian municipalities to restrict the use of pesticides within their boundaries. The decision marks the end of a 10-year lawsuit between the town of Hudson, Quebec and two companies – Chemlawn and Spraytech. The companies had sued the town, claiming municipalities did not have the power to control pesticide use. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that Canada’s unique political structure has set a challenging precedent.
In Canada we have so many different levels of government each with its own area of responsibility. The problem is these areas frequently overlap, causing a bureaucratic nightmare. This particularly Canadian phenomenon has been dubbed jurisdictional gridlock.
Look at how we handle pesticides. They have to be registered federally in order to be manufactured and marketed. Provincial permission is required for companies to sell or apply them. And at the local level, municipalities can enact by-laws concerning their application.
In the U.S., by contrast, the handling, distribution and licensing of pesticides all falls under federal jurisdiction. So at least you only have to deal with one level of government, which should save time and effort.
But a recent victory by the town of Hudson, Quebec has demonstrated that sometimes a lot of red tape can actually be a good thing. The town’s battle to control the use of pesticides within its borders went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The court not only upheld their right to protect local health and the environment, it also encouraged other municipalities to follow the Hudson example within the broad domain of Canadian and international law.
This wasn’t just a victory for community activists in Hudson. The Supreme Court decision gave all Canadian communities the power to take action on their own behalf. And believe me, they’re seizing that power. In the wake of the Hudson decision, towns and cities right across the country are in the process of enacting legislation that would severely restrict the use of pesticides within their borders.
This is a remarkable turn of events. And it clearly demonstrates the power that one small community can have. Jurisdictional gridlock may be a pain to wade through, but in light of what happened in Hudson, it can also be a really good thing.
A recent Canadian Government study shows that sports utility vehicles
are responsible for a seven-percent increase in auto emissions. Great
Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston thinks it’s time
consumers took a second look at the cost of comfort:
The International Joint Commission is calling on the United States and Canadian governments to commit to cleaning up long polluted areas of the Great Lakes. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports, the commission hopes to hold both countries accountable for the health of the lakes.