Starting January first, the U.S. will let farms and certain
other businesses use more of the pesticide methyl bromide. But
environmentalists may go to court over the issue. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
Starting January 1st, the U.S. will let farms and certain other businesses use more
of the pesticide
methyl bromide. But environmentalists may go to court on the issue. The Great
Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Methyl bromide is used to sterilize soil before planting and to fight invasive
insects that come
into the U.S. on wooden pallets. But scientists say emissions of methyl bromide
harm the ozone
layer. In the 1980s, the U.S. agreed to phase out use of the compound, except for
critical cases
where there are no feasible alternatives.
Methyl bromide use is only a third of what it was in 1991. But the Bush
administration wants to
let that figure rise to 37 percent this coming year. David Doniger is with the
Natural Resources
Defense Council. He says he doubts whether more methyl bromide is needed.
“The problem is the critical use exemptions have mushroomed… way out of control.
So we’re
going backwards.”
The U.S. has agreed to reduce use of methyl bromide in 2006… but critics say that
promise may not be kept. The NRDC says it’s likely to challenge the 2005 plan in
court. An
Indiana company is one of the nation’s largest suppliers of methyl bromide.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.
Mark Kubiske checks the valve that controls the flow of greenhouse gases to a stand of sugar maples, birch and aspen. (Photo by Jennifer Simonson)
One part of the greenhouse gas-making facility. (Photo by Jennifer
Simonson)
A stand of trees is surrounded by pipes that release greenhouse gases. (Photo by Jennifer Simonson)
Scientists from around the world are studying how higher levels of carbon dioxide will affect forests 100 years from now. They’re doing that by pumping higher levels of CO2 and ozone into stands of trees. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson visited the experimental forests and has this story:
Transcript
Scientists from around the world are studying how higher levels of carbon dioxide will affect forests 100 years from now. They’re doing that by pumping higher levels of CO2 and ozone into stands of trees. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson visited the experimental forests and has this story:
(sound of “quiet area”)
The north woods of the Great Lakes states are stands of millions of acres of pine, maple, birch, and aspen forests. It’s a perfect place to try to figure out how trees will react to the higher levels of ozone and carbon dioxide scientists expect in the future.
(sound of beeping fence gate)
The first thing you notice at Aspen Free Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment Project – Aspen FACE for short – is two huge tanks inside the fenced in enclosure. Each one is bigger than an 18-wheel tanker truck. They’re full of carbon dioxide… CO2. So much CO2 is used in this experiment, the tanks are filled twice a day.
(sound of filling tanks)
If you looked at the site from an airplane, you’d see 12 circular tree stands surrounded by 30 foot high pipes. Those pipes pour CO2 or ozone gases or both into the air surrounding birch, sugar maple, and aspen trees. The scientists know that greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere have been increasing. They believe two centuries of industrial pollution has contributed to the problem. And they expect the CO2 and ozone levels to double by the end of this century. They’re raising the level of greenhouse gasses in different mixes to see what the predicted levels will do to forests.
This open air project is different than previous experiments. David Karnosky is with Michigan Tech. He’s the Project Manager for Aspen FACE. He says before these kinds of projects, they just tested trees inside places like greenhouses.
“We needed to get out of those chambers. We needed to have a more realistic, real world sort of situation where we had multiple trees. We wanted real intact forest communities. We didn’t want to have just a small number of trees inside of a chamber.”
The United States Department of Energy launched this experiment in Wisconsin’s northwoods seven years ago. Karnosky says they’re learning how the trees react to the higher CO2 levels, and that could shape the future of the world’s timber industry.
“Who will be the winners? Who will be the losers? Will aspen or birch or sugar maple? In northern Wisconsin here we’ve got probably 40 million acres of those species mixes. What’s going to happen under elevated CO2 in the next 100 years? Will these forests remain as they are?”
(sound of driving on gravel)
Driving to one of the experimental circles, we pull up to a ring of trees. Mark Kubiske is one of the two full-time on-site researchers.
“Now this particular ring is an elevated CO2 plot. CO2 is delivered through this copper pipe. It runs to that fan, there’s a large fan right on the end of that gray building.”
The scientists have found that trees in the CO2 circles grow 30 percent faster than trees without the gas.
“The trees are larger in diameter, they’re straight, they have lots of leaf area, they just look very healthy. That is just in tremendous contrast to the ozone ring. We’ll go up around the corner and look at one.”
Nearby another circle of trees is not doing nearly as well. The trees are skinny, twisted not as tall as the other sites. Higher ozone levels are hurting the trees.
At the sites where pipes emit both ozone and CO2, the tree growth seems normal – except for some stunted maple trees. The leaves of the aspen and birch take in much of the CO2, convert it to sugar which goes to its roots, eventually becoming a natural part of the soil. That suggests forests may help alleviate gases that cause global warming. The Project Director, David Karnosky says CO2 and ozone appear to cancel each other out. But he says it’s too early to draw any firm conclusions. Ultimately, he says governments will be able to look at this glimpse into the future and try to come up with emissions policies that help.
“The whole issue of the Kyoto protocol, our government not signing off on that. There’s been some relaxing of the feelings from what I’ve seen from the President’s report now that they’re beginning to realize that elevated CO2 is having an impact on global warming and could be impacting our plant communities.”
Karnosky says it’s possible that besides reducing emissions, governments might determine that planting more trees might be very helpful in reducing greenhouse gasses worldwide.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mike Simonson.
Engineers say they have a new system that will extract more energy out of coal-fired power plants. And, they say, it has the added benefit of reducing pollution. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush reports:
Transcript
Engineers say they have a new system that will extract more energy out
of coal-fired power plants. And, they say, it has the added benefit of
reducing pollution. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush
reports:
Coal-fired power plants convert only one-third of the fuel’s energy
potential into electricity. The rest of that energy is heat that’s
lost out the smokestack. Engineers say they’ve now found a way to
capture that heat, transferring its energy into electricity.
Dan Stinger is president of Wow Energies. He says reducing heat in
smokestacks has an added benefit:
“Not only are we able to generate power from waste heat without
consuming fuel, which is an immediate reduction in pollution. But
we’re also able to knock the temperature out of an exhaust stack or
flue gas, and by doing that we condense out a lot of the pollutants
that normally would be exhausted into the environment up a huge exhaust
stack.”
Stinger says a cooler smokestack means fewer pollutants, such as
mercury and chemicals that cause acid rain and ozone, will be sent up
into the atmosphere. Instead, much of that pollution will be condensed
out and trapped. Stinger says the company plans to install its first
small-scale system by the middle of next year.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.
The EPA is getting ready for smog season. (photo courtesy of USEPA)
On ozone action days people with respiratory
problems are asked to stay indoors. (photo courtesy of
GATech)
Problem areas (with
ground-level ozone exceeding the new EPA standards) in the U.S. (photo courtesy of USEPA)
The federal government’s tougher regulations on pollution might have consequences on prices at the gasoline pump. To meet the Clean Air Act, some areas might be required to use cleaner-burning fuels. That could make it tougher to get gasoline supplies where they need to be. And that could mean higher prices. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The federal government’s tougher regulations on pollution might have consequences on prices at
the gasoline pump. To meet the Clean Air Act some areas might be required to use cleaner-
burning fuels. That could make it tougher to get gasoline supplies where they need to be. And
that could mean higher prices. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
The Environmental Protection Agency says 31 states are not complying with the Clean Air Act.
The EPA indicates tougher standards for ground-level ozone make many areas that didn’t know
they had a problem in violation of air pollution laws.
John Mooney is an environmental specialist with the EPA. He says the government used to
check for ozone pollution for short periods… but started monitoring for longer periods and found
more instances of high levels of ozone.
“The other issue is that we’re changing the number of the standard from 120 down to 80 parts-
per-billion. So, it’s a lower level that we’re looking at. And we think that’s more reflective of
the health effects that are being caused by this pollutant.”
Ground-level ozone aggravates asthma. People with lung diseases can find it hard to breathe.
And those who work outdoors are affected by the unhealthy air.
Ozone is created when factories and cars emit volatile organic compounds. That chemical stew is
affected by sunlight and ozone can form. Cities that have had high ozone levels have worked to
reduce emissions from businesses, encouraged car-pooling, made announcements asking people
not to use gas-powered mowers on high ozone days.
And… for some cities… part of the solution has been reformulated gasoline. It’s gas that’s
cleaner burning. Different formulations are used in different areas. And… gas formulas change
from winter to summer. Refineries and gasoline suppliers have to empty their tanks and pipelines
before switching. That makes gas supplies tight for a while and that drives the price up. We
asked the EPA’s John Mooney about that.
LG: We’ve got several cities with reformulated gasoline right now and that’s put a strain on the
distribution system nation-wide. If more cities have to start using reformulated gasoline and each
city has to have a different formulation, that’s going to further strain the distribution problem at a
time when gasoline prices are at an all time high.
JM: “We’re extremely sensitive to the infrastructure issue and the energy issue and are trying to
promote clean-burning fuels that have environmental impacts without significant economic
disruptions. Having fuel shortages and price spikes and things of that nature don’t contribute to
the success of our mission to improve public health. And so, we’re going to be tied into the fuel
distribution issues and we’re going to be working with the oil refiners to make sure that the fuels
programs that are ultimately decided upon operate without significant disruptions.”
Significant disruptions that could cause gasoline shortages and high prices.
Bob Slaughter is the President of NPRA, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association. He
says the government needs to work closely with gasoline suppliers to make sure that efforts to
make the air easier to breathe don’t make problems for the economy of an area.
“You know, you have to be very careful that you don’t have so many fuels in certain areas that it
becomes difficult to re-supply if there are problems, say, with a refinery or a pipeline in a
particular area.”
For instance, in recent years a fire at a refinery at a bad time meant shortages and higher prices.
But… even with lots of cooperation between government and the gasoline suppliers, the added
burden of different types of reformulated gasoline to the fuel distribution system might mean
spikes in gas prices.
(road sound, gas station)
We asked some people buying gas if they were willing to pay more if it meant cleaner air…
VOXPOP (voice 1) “Well, the gas prices are high enough. Uh, am I willing? I suppose so if it’s
better for the environment.” (voice 2) “Well, I think the federal government regulates everything
way too much right now. I think they do have a lot of safeguards in place right now to lower the
emissions in a lot of vehicles. Why do we have to make further regulation to control that?”
(voice 3) “I mean, I hate to – I hate to pay more gas prices. I really do. But, I guess for cleaner
air, it might be worth it.” (voice 4) “I haven’t thought about it too much. I pay what they make
me pay. I don’t care.”
The EPA is giving states and cities three years to get their ground-level ozone pollution problems
below the government’s new standards.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A new study indicates even when the EPA’s Air Quality Index is green, indicating ‘good’ air quality, the pollution in the air could trigger asthma problems for kids. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
A new study indicates even when the EPA’s Air Quality Index is green, indicating
‘good’ air
quality, the pollution in the air could trigger asthma problems for kids. The Great
Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
This study by Yale University looked at children who had asthma and measured the
effects of air
pollution such as ozone.
Janneane Gent led the study.
“And what we found was that among the children who had the more severe asthma, for
every 50
parts per billion increase in the level of ozone, the likelihood that they would
wheeze was
increased by 35 percent. And the chance that they would experience chest tightness
was
increased by 47 percent.”
That 50 parts per billion of ozone is within the range that’s considered ‘good’ air
quality by the
Environmental Protection Agency. Gent says that means even on ‘yellow’ or
‘moderate’ air
quality days parents should make sure kids with asthma are kept indoors and their
activity levels
kept low to avoid triggering asthma attacks.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. You might have heard of plants that burn garbage to create energy. But this plant is different. This plant would convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. You might have
heard of plants that burn garbage to create energy. But this plant is different. This plant
would convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie
Grant reports:
The walls of Genahol, Inc., are covered with pictures of Donald Bogner’s wife and
children. Bogner is a ruddy-looking man with a friendly attitude. He’s the kind of guy
who likes to get things done. He started Genahol seven years ago, with the idea that he
could turn paper, leaves, and grass clippings into fuel.
“The green waste is such a problem, because, what do you do with it? Well, you chop it
up, you mix manure with it, you package it, and sooner or later you finally say, hey, I
can’t sell this stuff.”
Bogner says Genahol can make fuel out nearly any plant material. A lot of green waste
winds up in landfills. But Bogner patented a new kind of process. It converts green and
paper waste to sugar, distills the sugar into alcohol and transforms the alcohol into
ethanol. Until now, ethanol has usually been made from corn or other grains. Bogner
says they’ve been surprised by how many products they can re-use to make ethanol.
Anything from stale beer, to old perfume, or factory-rejected candy…
“You just can’t imagine the volume when you start talking about Christmas candy canes.
And a bad batch of candy canes may be three million candy canes that a producer has to
destroy because they came out wrong in a batch or whatever. So, you know, three
million candy canes (laughs).”
If a Genahol facility is built, Bogner says it could convert anywhere from one hundred to
one-thousand tons of waste per day and make up to three million gallons of ethanol a
year. As long as the selling price of ethanol remains over a dollar a gallon, Bogner says
Genahol can make money. But he needs a deal. He needs a city that’s willing to let him
sort through the trash. It should be an easy sell, he says, because cities could save landfill
space and get a cut of the profits from ethanol sales.
“The hardest sell right now is that we cannot right now take them to a facility and show
them ethanol coming out of a spigot.”
And that’s the problem not only with Genahol, but with other companies that want to
convert waste to ethanol. Their ideas are theoretical. But Bogner says things are about to
change for Genahol. He’s negotiating a contract with the Solid Waste Authority of
Central Ohio, known as SWACO. It is in charge of trash in Columbus and owns one of
the largest public landfills in the country. Executive Director Mike Long is interested in
Bogner’s ideas.
“We are always looking for new methods, cost effective methods to reduce, reuse and
recycle the waste stream to reduce reliance on landfills. That is our primary purpose at
SWACO, to reduce reliance on landfills.”
SWACO already diverts yard wastes and paper from the trash stream, but there hasn’t
been much of a market for those products. That’s why Long says contracting with
Genahol makes sense.
“It’s being approached on, I think, a very conservative point of view, small scale pilot
project. Trying to minimize the risk to SWACO and the public from a financial point of
view.”
It might be a bit of a risk. SWACO and other trash managers got burned in the mid-
1990s by waste-to-energy facilities. Some plants were forced to close because they
emitted too much pollution. Genahol’s Don Bogner says the only emissions from his
plant will be carbon dioxide, which he plans to capture and sell for industrial use.
Bogner and SWACO are negotiating one of the first deals in the nation for a trash-to-
ethanol plant. Many entrepreneurs trying to sell similar ideas are having a tough time
making a deal. Monte Shaw, an ethanol industry spokesperson, says these companies
should hang on a little longer.
“It’s always harder to be first. It’s always harder to convince investors, and banks, and
government agencies, that this is going to work. ”
The government is considering tax breaks and financial assistance to encourage new
ethanol plants. One reason the government is interested is to cut dependence on foreign
oil. Another reason, is ethanol is a good replacement for MTBE in gasoline. MTBE has
been used to reduce ozone pollution, but the chemical has contaminated water supplies
and the government wants to phase it out. Don Bogner expects the move from MTBE to
increase demand for ethanol. He’s wondering if that means Genahol will be able to turn a
profit.
“That’s what my wife asks me, are we going to make money this year?”
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Grant in Kent.
A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. This could be one of the first plants in the nation to convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. This could be one
of the first plants in the nation to convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:
The president of Genahol, Inc., says his facilities can make fuel out of nearly any plant
material. A lot of paper, leaves, and grass clippings wind up in landfills. But Donald
Bogner patented a new kind of process. It converts green waste to sugar, distills the
sugar into alcohol and transforms the alcohol into ethanol. Ethanol is usually made from
corn or other grains. Bogner says Genahol reuses other people’s trash.
“Genahol actually receives payment for its materials. Rather than going out and having
to pay a dollar fifty to two fifty a bushel for corn or something, we actually get paid on a
tonnage basis. So it can be very, very profitable.”
No Genahol facility has yet been built. Bogner and the Solid Waste Authority of Central
Ohio are negotiating one of the first deals in the nation for a trash-to-ethanol plant.
For
the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Grant in Kent.
Although commercial airlines have been replacing their fleets with jets that are quieter and more fuel efficient, the engines actually emit more of certain pollutants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham explains:
Transcript
Although commercial airlines have been replacing their fleets with jets that are quieter and more
fuel efficient, the engines actually emit more of certain pollutants. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham explains:
The federal government’s watchdog agency, the General Accounting Office, issued a report that
finds many airports have worked to reduce air pollution. Some have converted airport ground
vehicles to cleaner burning fuels. Newer jet engines emit less carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbons. But, they produce higher amounts of nitrogen oxides than engines on the older
models. As much as 40-percent more during landings and take offs. Those emissions contribute
to ozone pollution. That’s helping to keep more than half of the nation’s major airports in
violation of the federal ozone standards.
The General Accounting Office noted there are technologies available to limit nitrogen oxides
emissions from some of the newer aircraft models. Many government officials indicate that will
likely have to be the next step if ozone pollution around the airports is to be reduced.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
Scientists are talking about a new way to address global warming. Their idea is to take carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants and inject it deep into the earth. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie MacDowell explains:
Transcript
Scientists are talking about a new way to address global warming. Their idea is to take carbon
dioxide from coal-burning power plants and inject it deep into the earth. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Annie Macdowell explains:
It’s called carbon sequestration. The idea is to use a chemical process to remove carbon dioxide
from power plant emissions and pressurize it into a liquid form. The liquid would then be injected
into saline aquifers up to ten thousand feet below the ground.
The government wants to create 4 to 10 regional partnerships to study the possibility of carbon
sequestration. One of the potential sites is in the Illinois Basin. The basin extends throughout three
quarters of Illinois, into Western Indiana and Western Kentucky.
Robert Finley is the director of the Center for Energy and Earth Resources at the Illinois State
Geological Survey. He says carbon sequestration could be a good transition for the country as it
moves away from using fossil fuels.
“It would allow us to use coal in a more environmentally responsible way while we look toward the
future with additional use of renewables and ultimately, perhaps, going to a hydrogen economy.”
Finley says at this point, sequestration doesn’t work with other pollutants found in power plant
emissions, such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and mercury.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Annie MacDowell.
Canada’s environment minister is threatening action if Ontario doesn’t meet the air pollution standards set out in a treaty signed by Canada and the U.S., but as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports – environmentalists remain skeptical that change will occur:
Transcript
Canada’s environment minister is threatening action if Ontario doesn’t meet the air pollution standards set out in a treaty signed by Canada and the U.S. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, environmentalists remain skeptical that change will occur:
Canadian environment minister David Anderson says he may take action if Ontario fails to meet the targets it agreed to under the 2000 Canada-U.S. treaty to cut ozone. The treaty requires Ontario’s power plants to cut emissions of nitrogen dioxide in half by 2007. Jerry Dimarco, a lawyer with the Sierra Legal Defense Fund, agrees that Ontario is falling short of that goal. But he says there’ve been other warnings, and little has been done.
“We’ve seen a federal environment minister who’s said the right things, in terms of telling Ontario
that they should reduce emissions. What we need is a federal environment minister who tells Ontario they must reduce emissions.”
The Canadian government currently lacks the ability to enforce clean air standards. A 1999 law grants federal officials the power to create new regulations. But they have yet to do so.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
