Tag: technology

Noise Pollution: Shhhhhh!

  • Everywhere you go, there's bound to be something making noise. (Photo by Lester Graham)

We live in a world that’s filled with noise. But when things get
too loud, the sounds can affect us in all kinds of ways. Kyle
Norris talks to one man who says that loud noises are a health,
ethical, spiritual, and environmental issue:

Transcript

We live in a world that’s filled with noise. But when things get
too loud, the sounds can affect us in all kinds of ways. Kyle
Norris talks to one man who says that loud noises are a health,
ethical, spiritual, and environmental issue:


For Les Blomberg, it all started with a sound like this:


(Sound of Blomberg imitating buzzing)


That’s Blomberg imitating the sound of the street sweeper. It
would clean his street at four in the morning. Blomberg says he
had never thought much about noise pollution…until this
happened, and it made him all tired and cranky. Eventually
Blomberg got the city to change the time of day when it cleaned
the street.


This experience got him interested in the topic of noise
pollution:


“To me kind of at the core, noise is an issue of civility. How
you treat your neighbor. It’s an environmental issue. Noise is a
pollutant that we’re casting out. It’s a waste product. It’s kind of
like second hand smoke. It’s the waste product of our activities
that we’re casting out into the environment.”


Blomberg’s passion for noise pollution grew as he learned more
about it, and he realized it’s an under-rated, under-appreciated
problem. Now he runs the Noise Pollution Clearinghouse. It’s
an organization that tries to keep the peace and quiet, the
organization connects people with noise experts and activists.
It fights for stronger noise regulations and standards, and it tests
consumer products to find out which are the quietest.


Blomberg says people usually contact him with one of three
kinds of noise problems. Jets and helicopters (sound of jet),
highway noise (sound of highway), and noises from electronic
amplification (sound of music) — like loud stereos. People tell
him these noises ruin their sleep, concentration, and quality of
life… and all those things put people in bad moods and can ruin
how they deal with other people.


Loud noises also trigger a physiological response in our bodies.
That’s what Les Blomberg says:


“When we were evolving, when things were noisy it was
usually a warning that something wrong was happening. If the
lion walk through camp and you didn’t hear it coming, you
would be breakfast for that critter. And so we evolved to deal
with that. Our hearing works twenty-four hours a day, it can
wake us up if we hear noises in our environment.”


As humans evolved, Blomberg says that loud noises would
trigger a quick little shot of adrenaline, leading to fight or flight.
He says we still go through this stress response today, when we
hear a loud noise, even though we know it’s only a siren or an
air conditioner and not a lion.


Loud, isolated noises like a street sweeper or a leaf-blower can
be temporarily problematic, but if you’re continuously exposed
to loud noises like these over time, they can lead to serious
damage. Each year in this country 30 million people suffer
from hearing losses.


Paul Kileny is the Director of Audiology & Electrophysiology
at the University of Michigan’s Health System. He says hearing
is the essence of human communication:


“People who have significant hearing loss they have a variety of
emotional problems. They withdraw. They isolate themselves
because they have trouble hearing. They don’t socialize.”


So loud noises aren’t just an inconvenience. They can bring
about real emotional problems. Les Blomberg with the Noise
Pollution Clearinghouse says we don’t have to live in a noisy
world. Technology has the ability to make things quieter.


Noise-cancellation systems and acoustic buffering can make
cars, appliances, and even lawn equipment quieter. Engineers
can make road surfaces quieter to drive on, but these changes
cost money and will have to come from the various industries
wanting to change.


Blomberg says that’s starting to happen, but slowly. He believes
loud noises are also an ethical issue. He says it’s like the golden
rule, of treating people the way you’d like to be treated and that
we can all do a “politeness check,” by making sure we’re not
imposing our sounds on our neighbors.


For the Environment Report, I’m Kyle Norris.

Related Links

Green Cars: A Tough Sell

  • Hybrid cars like this Honda Insight look good to consumers at first...until they see the price tag. (Photo courtesy of the National Park Service)

We’re hearing a lot more from automakers these days about new
technologies that will save you gas. Most of the technologies they talk about
are not in showrooms yet. So when will they be? And which technologies
will find their way to your car first? Dustin Dwyer has some answers:

Transcript

We’re hearing a lot more from automakers these days about new
technologies that will save you gas. Most of the technologies they talk about
are not in showrooms yet. So when will they be? And which technologies
will find their way to your car first? Dustin Dwyer has some answers:


There is already one kind of car out there that will save you a lot of gas. You’ve heard of
it before. It’s a hybrid. And it seems like everyone says they want one. They say they do:


“I live in the world where I don’t deal with what people say they think, or what they give
to a survey. I live in the world where they write the check.”


That’s Mike Jackson. He’s the head of the country’s largest chain of car dealerships –
Autonation. Jackson is pretty much the prototypical, no-nonsense businessman. He’s also
somewhat of an unlikely environmentalist, but Jackson doesn’t have much faith in today’s
hybrids:


“70% of our customers want to talk about hybrids when they walk through the door.
They’re aware of it. They think it’s a great idea. And they’re predisposed to buy hybrids.
You then get them at the table.”


Jackson says that’s when the customer asks how much extra the hybrid costs, and how
long it takes to make that money up by saving at the pump. That’s when the deal falls
apart:


“And we have a two percent closing rate.”


Jackson says, plain and simple, most people just aren’t willing to pay the extra money to
get a hybrid. So he says to really cut gas use, the industry still needs mass market
solutions, and the first technology that he’s looking out for is something that Ford
announced earlier this year. Ford’s chief marketing guy, Jim Farley calls it Ecoboost:


“Which uses direct fuel injection and turbocharging to get big engine power and all that
low end torque we love from smaller, inherently more fuel efficient engines.”


Direct injection and turbocharging have been around,
but mostly as a way to make cars go faster. Now the idea is to use them on small engines
so that when a customer comes in and wants a big powerful engine, Ford can give them
Ecoboost, which promises the same power with 20 percent less gas, and 15 percent fewer
CO2 emissions. Ford plans to put Ecoboost in more than half a million cars per year
within the next five years.


In that same time frame, you can also expect to see more diesel engines coming out from
all the automakers. Diesel will get you better mileage, and it’s now cleaner in some ways
than gasoline. But it can create more smog-forming gases such as nitrous oxide.


Ethanol is also still out there. But at best, most people say today’s corn ethanol really
doesn’t save any fossil fuels when you look at what it takes to raise the corn. So the big
hope is cellulosic ethanol, which can be made from grasses, or even used tires.


Nobody’s found a good way to make it yet and Mike Jackson, the no-nonsense car
salesman, says he’s not holding his breath. Instead, he’s looking for the real game
changer – hybrid vehicles that can be charged through a wall socket and run on electricity
alone for miles before a gas engine has to kick in. Jackson expects those plug-in hybrids
on the road within five years:


“The cost-benefit ratio is going to be so compelling, and people are going to be so
enthralled at the idea they don’t have to go to the gas station, just go home and plug it into
the socket, this idea will win over American consumers.”


The auto companies are scrambling to make a plug in hybrid. Right now the race is
basically between General Motors and Toyota. Both say they might be able to build a
plug in hybrid by 2010.


The problem is the battery. To get the higher charge, hybrids need a new kind of battery –
something called a lithium ion battery. It’s the same kind of battery, it turns out, that’s
used in your cell phone, but there are some challenges scaling that up for an automobile.
Lithium ion batteries can overheat, and right now they’re more expensive than the
batteries in today’s hybrids.


But Bob Lutz at General Motors says you can bet those problems will be solved:


“Every manufacturer in the world is hot on the trail of lithium ion technology, and the
battery manufacturers all say it’s going to work.”


And once you have viable lithium ion batteries, you’re talking about cars that can get
more than 100 miles to the gallon or better.


Most people say the next step is hydrogen fuel cells. With the fuel cells, you put
hydrogen in, and the only thing that comes out of the tail pipe is water vapor.
Some in the industry say fuel cells could be ready for the mass market in the 2020s.
Mike Jackson isn’t so sure. He pegs the arrival of fuel cells at somewhere between not in
our lifetime and never.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Autos Part 2: Carmakers Slow to Adopt New Battery

  • The powertrain of the Chevy Volt. This concept image shows the lithium ion battery pack running down the center of the vehicle. (Image courtesy of GM)

Car companies are making plenty of promises these days about future
cars that will save you gas. To make them happen,
automakers are counting on a new kind of battery. They’re called lithium ion
batteries. These batteries could bring about a revolution in automobiles.
In the second part of a two-part series on green cars, Dustin Dwyer reports it could take a while for the revolution to get
here:

Transcript

Car companies are making plenty of promises these days about future
cars that will save you gas. To make them happen,
automakers are counting on a new kind of battery. They’re called lithium ion
batteries. These batteries could bring about a revolution in automobiles.
In the second part of a two-part series on green cars, Dustin Dwyer reports it could take a while for the revolution to get
here:


Lithium ion sounds like a complicated term. And you don’t necessarily need to know
what it means. But it might help to know that you already use lithium ion batteries every
day:


“It’s being used now in video cameras, personal phones, it’s in iPods, it’s in a lot of small
electronics and in, of course, laptop computers.”


That’s Jim Hall. He’s a consultant to the auto industry. His company is called 2953
Analytics. Hall’s had some experience working on battery powered cars. He says lithium
ion batteries are attractive because they can store a lot more power than the batteries in
today’s hybrid vehicles, and Hall says in the race to get lithium ion batteries into cars,
there are two leading companies: General Motors and Toyota.


They have different approaches to getting the batteries ready, but they both depend on
contractors outside the company to figure out the complicated chemistry. Hall says the
problem is right now, they need a breakthrough:


“And the breakthrough could come from an entirely different source. It could be from
another company that neither company is dealing with. It could. That’s the thing with
breakthroughs. You can’t predict how and when they happen.”


As we mentioned, battery engineers have already invented ways to make lithium ion
work in small things like cell phones, laptops and power drills. But it’s not as easy to
make the batteries work for something big, like a car.


Hall says one problem is cost. Lithium ion batteries are expensive. Another problem is
heat. The more energy you store in a lithium ion battery, the better the chances that the
battery could become unstable. If it becomes too hot, the battery could explode. That’s
already been a problem in some laptops.


Bob Lutz is the Vice Chairman of General Motors. He says his company has already
solved the heat problem with lithium ion batteries by using a different chemistry than
what’s in laptops:


“We’ve cycled ’em in hot rooms, maximum discharge rate, and cut out the cooling system
to simulate a cooling system failure in the car, and we’ve had a temperature rise of maybe
eight degrees centigrade, I mean, just not enough to worry about.”


GM expects to put the batteries in test cars and start running them on roads late this
spring. The goal is a lithium ion powered hybrid car named the Chevy Volt. It will go
forty miles on battery power alone, before a gas engine has to kick in. Lutz says he has no
doubt that the Volt will be ready to go by mid-2010, but officially, GM has not
set a production date.


Toyota says it’s also shooting to have the technology ready by 2010. But no other
automaker will even mention a date for lithium ion batteries. Not Ford. Not Honda. Not
Chrysler. Chrysler President Tom Lasorda says there’s a reason for that:


“When you’re trying to predict when a technology is going to be ready for mass market,
it’s very tough. Because you don’t know what the surprises might be.”


In the next few years, you can expect auto executives to make a lot of references to
lithium ion batteries. And basically anyone you talk to in the industry says these
batteries are no doubt, the next big thing that will save you gas.


The question is when. When will lithium ion batteries actually be in your car? Maybe
2010. Maybe a lot later. No one can really say for sure.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Geothermal at Home

  • Swimmers in Iceland enjoy the toasty Blue Lagoon hot springs. (Photo by Kurt Holtz)

You might be hearing about geothermal energy more and more. But what exactly is geothermal energy? The new federal Energy Act calls for more research and investment into the alternative energy source. Robbie Harris has more on this long used, but little known technology, for tapping the earth’s heat:

Transcript

You might be hearing about geothermal energy more and more. But what exactly is geothermal energy? The new federal Energy Act calls for more research and investment into the alternative energy source. Robbie Harris has more on this long used, but little known technology, for tapping the earth’s heat:


(“Now look at that!” “Wow!”)


(whooshing of geyser)


In Iceland, where geysers gush from the ground and steam rises from the bays, geothermal is the number one source of energy. This island nation in the north Atlantic burns virtually no fossil fuel to heat or cool its buildings.


“You will probably not see a building that is not heated by geothermal
energy during your visit here.”


Pall Valdimarsson is Director of Research and Development with Enix. It’s Iceland’s largest geothermal consulting firm.


“And I myself, I have never lived in a house in Iceland without geothermal
energy, not in my whole life and I am not the youngest one as you can see.”


Valdimarsson says Iceland has used a special technology to tap earth-generated heat since the 1930s. And why not? It’s everywhere on this volcanic island. The first settlers here in the eighth century saw what they called “smoke” rising from the hot springs.


Today, steam blasts from hot water wells at Iceland’s newest, state of the art geothermal plant. The steam spins turbines to make electricity. The superheated water is piped directly into buildings where it gives up its heat. This heat exchange is the core concept behind geothermal technology.


Hans Bennimidgel is a spokesman for the power plant. He says the benefits for Iceland are simple:


“Clean energy and dirt cheap.”


Few places have the hot water resources Iceland has. But according to the Geothermal Resource Council, superheated water is available virtually anywhere in the world, if you drill deep enough.


The U.S. already taps this underground hot water to produce more geothermal electricity than Iceland does. And that’s expected to grow sharply, but for decades Americans have also used a different form of geothermal energy to heat
and cool buildings.


Erik Larson is a vice-president of Indie Energy. He calls it the other geothermal, which is, basically:


“Free heat from the earth and an extremely efficient way to eject heat from
the building in the summer time.”


Larson says geothermal, or geo-exchange systems, are comparable to traditional
heating, ventilation and cooling systems. But they use the earth’s constant underground temperature — around 55 degrees in most of the U.S. — to take the edge off a building’s heating and cooling load:


“Geothermal heat pump technology like we’re talking about can be done
anywhere in the country. Anywhere where there is ground to drill we can
put in our closed loop wells to draw heat from the earth to provide an HVAC
system.”


For a long time in rural areas, large horizontal loops several feet
underground captured and released heat. But in urban areas, there wasn’t
enough land. Now Larson says Indie Energy uses a new drilling technique
known as a vertical closed loop system. He says they can be installed under
almost any building. Pipes inside wells hold a fluid, which continuously
circulates between the ground and the building — creating a heat exchange.
Larson says a geothermal system saves owners money:


“We are a system that you would fully own through the ground loops or these
wells that we put in…through the distribution which is basically happening
within your building. So it adds value to your property, you control it and you
take advantage of all the savings.”


Larson says geothermal systems for buildings cost anywhere from 50 to 100 percent more than a typical heating, cooling, and ventilation system. But he says, most pay for themselves in five to eight years with the energy savings.


Business is booming. Larson says Indie Energy plans to expand in two new locations this year. Four months ago, they installed a large geothermal system at Boocoo Community Center in Evanston, Illinois. During the installation, they helped train new workers in geothermal technology. It was a joint project between Indie Energy and Boocoo. They’re training workers for a new green industry they hope will not only save resources, but create new jobs.


(Sound of hammers in Community Center)


For the Environment Report, I’m Robbie Harris.

Related Links

A Future for ‘Futuregen’?

  • FutureGen would burn coal and capture carbon dioxide produced in coal plants like this one. (Photo by Erin Toner)

The federal project known as FutureGen now has a home. The zero-emissions coal-to-
hydrogen plant is to be built in Illinois. It’s been in the planning stages for several years.
But, there are skeptics who doubt FutureGen will ever be built. Sean Crawford reports:

Transcript

The federal project known as FutureGen now has a home. The zero-emissions coal-to-
hydrogen plant is to be built in Illinois. It’s been in the planning stages for several years.
But, there are skeptics who doubt FutureGen will ever be built. Sean Crawford reports:


Many power plants already burn coal, but there is growing concern the
emissions they release into the atmosphere contribute to global warming.
The solution would be a way to use this plentiful, domestic resource – coal –
without emissions.


That’s where FutureGen comes in. The plant, a research facility, would
burn coal and capture nearly all the carbon dioxide produced in the
process. Instead of floating into the atmosphere, the greenhouse gas
would be stored underground. Other emissions such as sulfur dioxide and
nitrous oxides would be removed.


If that plant is successful, it means coal could be a more popular fuel.
Since there’s billions of tons of it in the U.S., it would mean much less
dependence on foreign fuel such as natural gas. Coal could even be a
substitute fuel for automobiles if it’s converted to hydrogen or a coal diesel
fuel.


That potential for FutureGen to start a coal resurrection almost sounds too
good to be true, and Ken Maize believes that’s the case.


Maize is editor for Power Magazine, which is a publication that for
more than a century has focused on electricity generation. He says for all
the hype over FutureGen, power companies remain uninterested. He says
it would be expensive for them to install technology FutureGen promotes.


Power providers in the private sector, who had been expected to put
money toward the building of FutureGen, have mostly stayed on the
sidelines. That means the cost to the federal government has ballooned to
nearly twice what it was when FutureGen was introduced. Maize has taken
to calling the project Never Gen because he doubts it will be built:


“You know it’s been political from the beginning of course. Bush wanted to show he
was doing something for energy. It has all of the elements of projects, scores of projects that I have seen in the past, that
looked like they were going to go somewhere and the wheels begin to
wobble and pretty soon they come off.”


But the coal mining industry hopes that doesn’t happen with FutureGen.
Phil Gonet lobbies for Illinois’ coal companies. He thinks FutureGen has a
future:


“I’m cautiously optimistic that the funding will proceed. What started as a 1
billion dollar project, the last figure I saw was about 1.4. So you kinda get concerned. And when government is
funding even a portion of that, I think there is some concern but I’m optimistic, the
funding has been included in President Bush’s budget and hopefully
whoever the next president is will see the wisdom of this.”


FutureGen has come under scrutiny for the rising cost, but it still has a lot
of support in environmental circles. Harry Henderson is with the Natural
Resource Defense Council. He likes the potential FutureGen brings, but
says no one should expect a lot of new clean burning coal plants to come
online in the near future, unless the federal government requires tighter
emission controls for existing facilities. As for only building new plants
with the carbon capture technology, he says it won’t make financial sense:


“Presently, an investment in highly, highly expensive infrastructure when they would be
competing against people who would be competing against people who
had absolutely almost no burden to do this, like the current plants that capture absolutely no carbon, when you’re competing against them, it is an unfair competition.”


But FutureGen is a model. It could show what could be done with coal.
That’s important to Illinois, since coal is becoming an increasingly
unpopular fuel because of the growing concern about global warming.


Jack Lavin is the Economic Development Director for the State of Illinois.
He’s put countless hours, energy, and dollars into landing FutureGen in
his state. But while Lavin celebrates Mattoon, Illinois’ selection as home to
the nearly zero-emissions coal-burning power plant, he knows his work is
far from finished:


“There’s lots of competing interests for budget priorities. And we believe that clean coal is a very high budget priority. And that’s going to
take work with the Congress, the Department of Energy and whoever’s in
the White House, to make sure those projects are fully funded… including
FutureGen.”


It’s unclear if there’s a long term commitment to FutureGen at the federal
level. Construction could begin in another year, but the Department of Energy is already talking about restructuring the project with a hefty price tag, there’s speculation President Bush’s initiative could be shelved once he
leaves office. For those in the coal industry, and the State of Illinois, making sure the federal
government follows through with its promise could be the toughest sell job
of all.


For the Environment Report, I’m Sean Crawford.

Related Links

Business Trash Audits

  • Plant manager of Anheuser-Busch points out the plastic labels of the beer bottles now being recycled. (Photo by Karen Kasler)

Chain restaurants and retailers often test
their latest services and products in Columbus, Ohio
before launching them nationwide. It’s one of the
nation’s big test markets. But ‘going green’ is not
a trend that’s going well. Karen Kasler reports
recycling rates are well below the national average.
But businesses in this key market are beginning to
show more interest:

Transcript

Chain restaurants and retailers often test
their latest services and products in Columbus, Ohio
before launching them nationwide. It’s one of the
nation’s big test markets. But ‘going green’ is not
a trend that’s going well. Karen Kasler reports
recycling rates are well below the national average.
But businesses in this key market are beginning to
show more interest:


Columbus often bills itself as the nation’s test market. It’s demographics are seen as a reflection
of the nation as a whole. But this national test market is not at the front of the curve when it
comes recycling and other ‘green practices.’ For example, many companies around the country
have going green in the last few years, but businesses in Columbus are just starting to test the
waters.


John Remy works for SWACO, the Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio It operates the area’s
landfill. Remy has only recently noticed a sudden jump in the number of calls he’s getting every
day:


“The boss wants the business to go green, and so the employees are left to, how do I go
green? And so they call us and want to know, how do I go green? And how do I do it five
minutes before I called you?”


SWACO advises businesses to audit their waste — to dig into trash cans and dumpsters and see
how much paper, plastic, glass, cardboard, food and other material is there and can be
recycled. Some big corporations were already working on that. Columbus’ Anheuser-Busch
brewery is one of big brewer’s 12 plants nationwide. Plant manager Kevin Lee says “green beer”
is not just a St. Patrick’s Day thing here. He says it’s a way of doing business, from the way the
bottles are labeled:



“The backing off of these labels that are applied onto the Bud Light bottle, we recycle the
backing, and there was approximately 66,000 miles of backing a year that is plastic
backing that’s recycled.”


To the cans that fall off the filling lines and end up in hoppers:


“And we send those cans back to a recycling area where the cans are crushed, they’re
sent for aluminum recycling purposes…”


Lee says the idea is to save money and cut down on trash:


“Everything that is consumed off the line, whether it’s the waste beer or the
waste cans or the waste bottles or cardboard, we want to take those materials, treat them
or recycle them, so that we reduce our demand on the environment certainly, reduce our
costs, and that allows us to be the most responsible manufacturer we can be.”


Multi-million dollar automated operations can afford to smoothly snap new green technology
into their production lines, but it’s a little more hands-on in smaller companies and in non-profit
organizations.


Catholic priest David Gwinner did things the old-fashioned way at St. Paul’s parish just north of
Columbus. He stands by one of two eight-cubic-yard recycling bins outside the church offices.
And he says he started by sorting the trash on his own:


“Many days I would take the recycling, separate it and take it in my car.
Yes, in my Oldsmobile sitting over there and my dog, Margaret. And it started to be two,
three trips a day.”


After a few months of dumpster diving, Gwinner decided to organize the St. Paul’s staff in a
recycling effort. In the last year, Gwinner says everyone has gotten in on it – workers in the
administrative offices, guests in the meeting rooms, and the thousand kids in the school. Now,
the trash dumpsters are emptied three times a week instead of every day, which Gwinner says
has saved the parish 2,400 dollars over the last year. But Gwinner says it’s about more
than money. He’s preaching that this is a “partnership with creation,” and now his mission is to
get that message out to his 12,000 parishioners, many of whom own businesses:


“And if they had one or two or three pounds a day, times 12,000, times 365 days a year.
That tells the story of how huge… it’s a million tons a year that SWACO is receiving that’s
going into the ground. And they believe that a great percent of that is recyclable.”


A study a few years ago concluded 60 percent of commercial and residential trash is
recyclable, with paper and plastics the most common things thrown away. But even as
businesses are trying to take their bottom lines to zero when it comes to waste, their employees
may not be taking that attitude home. 88 percent of people in this test market town don’t
recycle. That number is nearly four times the stat from a recent Harris poll which shows the
national non-recycling average is 23 percent.


For the Environment Report, I’m Karen Kasler.

Related Links

Efficient Faucets

There’s a new federal program aimed at encouraging more water conservation at your
bathoom faucet. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

There’s a new federal program aimed at encouraging more water conservation at your
bathoom faucet. Chuck Quirmbach reports:


The US Environmental Protection Agency has issued specifications for bathroom faucet
manufacturers to qualify for the agency’s WaterSense label. The EPA wants about a 30
percent reduction in water flow from conventional models.


Kohler corporation engineer Rob Zimmerman says the smaller size of the flow restrictor
inside the faucet’s aerator will be the key to hitting the new target. He acknowledges some
water utilities wanted the new flow limit to be one gallon per minute, instead of the 1.5
per gallon limit specified by the EPA:


“The WaterSense program is flexible enough that as technology improves, they can change the
specification, but at this point the 1.5 was what everyone agreed to.”


The EPA says consumers will also save energy by heating and treating less water.


For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Power Plant Tests Carbon Capture

  • A pipe has been connected to the flue gas duct at We Energies' coal-burning power plant near Milwaukee. The pipe will suck out a small amount of gas and treat it with chilled ammonia, allowing CO2 to be separated and captured. (Photo by Erin Toner)

Coal-burning power plants have done a lot to reduce
pollution that leaves their smokestacks. But the power
industry is not controlling the main greenhouse gas –
carbon dioxide. That could change in the next decade.
One utility is about to begin the first test ever of technology
to reduce CO2 emissions at power plants. Erin Toner
reports:

Transcript

Coal-burning power plants have done a lot to reduce
pollution that leaves their smokestacks. But the power
industry is not controlling the main greenhouse gas –
carbon dioxide. That could change in the next decade.
One utility is about to begin the first test ever of technology
to reduce CO2 emissions at power plants. Erin Toner
reports:


When you think about air pollution, you might think of
power plants with giant brick chimneys pumping dark
smoke into the sky. here’s not as much of that stuff being released
into the air as 30 years ago. That’s because power plants have added equipment to control certain types of pollution:


“Okay, just to give you an idea of what we’re looking at,
this big silver building is where all the particulate is
removed, we’re going from that toward the stacks, so
we’re looking at the discharge emissions control
devices…”


Ed Morris oversees environmental projects at We Energies’
coal-burning power plant in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin. In
the past few years, it’s installed equipment that’s cut sulfur
and nitrogen emissions by up to 95 percent. Now it’s going
after carbon dioxide, or CO2, the most prevalent manmade
greenhouse gas that no utility has yet controlled.


By the end of the year, the We Energies plant will begin the
first test in the country of a new technology called “carbon
capture:”


“We are designing the technology to achieve up to 90
percent CO2 removal.”


Sean Black is with Alstom, the company that designed the
process. It will inject chilled ammonia into a tiny stream of
boiler gas. This will theoretically allow the CO2 to be
separated and captured. The test will see how much can be
removed before the gas is sent up the chimney.


Black says after the test in Wisconsin, it’ll go on to a full-
scale demonstration at an American Electric Power coal-
burning plant in West Virginia:


“And that will provide the marketplace with the
credibility that this technology is ready for commercial
deployment.”


The coal-burning power industry is trying to get carbon
capture ready because it believes the government will soon
start regulating CO2 emissions.


Kris McKinney manages environmental policy for We
Energies, and its pilot CO2 program:


“Technology doesn’t exist today to capture, let alone
store, the CO2 emissions, reductions that would be
required in the event that federal legislation is passed.”


Power companies have been criticized for moving too
slowly on cutting CO2 pollution. Some environmentalists
say utilities could have been doing more earlier, but won’t
spend the money on new technology if they’re not required
to by the government.


We Energies’ Kris McKinney says they’re wrong about the
status of the technology, but right about the money. He
says that’s because the cost of adding the CO2 reduction
equipment has to be passed on to customers:


“Whatever happens has to happen over a longer period
of time…it needs to be thought out in a way that doesn’t
cause dramatic cost impacts, unanticipated cost
impacts.”


McKinney says rushing to add new pollution controls
would be a huge risk. And in the case of carbon capture,
he could be right.


The government’s
has raised concerns about the chilled ammonia process. A
report that has not been made public says 90 percent CO2
reduction has not happened in early testing, and might not
be possible.


It also says carbon capture could dramatically increase the
energy needed to run a power plant.


George Peridas is a science fellow with the Natural
Resources Defense Council, an environmental
organization:


“The publicity that this is receiving is disproportionate
to the actual results that they have achieved. And there
are fundamental scientific reasons to question whether
this can be done.”


Alstom, the company developing chilled ammonia carbon
capture, says it won’t comment on the government’s report
because it hasn’t been made public. Company officials do say they’re confident the technology will work. They’re predicting the full-scale process will be
ready to retrofit existing plants or to build into new ones in
five years.


If so, it’ll be one option for a power industry that’s under
increasing pressure – and likely government mandates – to
clean up its dirty legacy.


For the Environment Report, I’m Erin Toner.

Related Links

State Car Emissions Ok’d

  • Most of the cuts would come from tailpipe emissions, but the UCS says other improvements can be made in engine design as well.(Photo by Mark Brush)

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a state law aimed at cutting greenhouse gases from
cars and light trucks. Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a state law aimed at cutting greenhouse gases from
cars and light trucks. Mark Brush has more:


Like 11 other state laws – the Vermont law calls for a 30% cut in heat-trapping gas
emissions by 2016. Automakers sued Vermont saying these kinds of regulations would
hurt the industry and can not be made by individual states. A federal judge disagreed.


Michelle Robinson is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. She says the judge heard
from the group’s engineers. They designed a minivan that would meet these new
standards with technology that exists today:


“There’s no need to change the look of the vehicle or the performance of the vehicle in
any way. So you could maintain the levels of safety and performance that drivers expect
while improving the pollution performance of the vehicle.”


Aside from a likely appeal from the auto industry, the states are also waiting on the
Environmental Protection Agency. They have to get a waiver from the EPA before they
can enforce their laws.


For the Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Detecting Lead in Toys

  • Bill Radosevich tests the sword on the lego creature Phyllis Gallzo's son plays with. (Photo by Lisa Ann Pinkerton)

Fisher Price recently recalled 10 million toys containing lead paint and tiny magnets. The news is making health officials and many parents wonder about other
objects children play with. In the past, testing objects for lead has been time consuming,
but new technology could make lead detection in everyday objects easier and faster. Lisa
Ann Pinkerton has more:

Transcript

Fisher Price recently recalled 10 million toys containing lead paint and tiny magnets. The news is making health officials and many parents wonder about other
objects children play with. In the past, testing objects for lead has been time consuming,
but new technology could make lead detection in everyday objects easier and faster. Lisa
Ann Pinkerton has more:


In a canvas shopping bag, Phyllis Gallzo has 3 of her son’s favorite toys. In her hand is
one made of Legos that looks like an alien robot creature. She’s afraid it could contain
lead:


“Listening to the news and concern about toys coming from China, I was very
concerned my son getting exposure to the chemicals he really didn’t need. So I brought in
the toys that he plays with mostly.”


Eighty percent of America’s toys are made in China, so Gallzo’s come to a free lead
screening event held by the Ohio Network for the Chemically Injured to find out about her
son’s toys. The action figure she holds is sporting a long silver sword. It’s pockmarked,
from being chewed on by Gallzo’s 8 year old son. If the sword was manufactured with
lead-based plastic or paint the toy could be giving her son small doses of lead and slowly
poisoning him. Lead is a neuro-toxin and has been linked to learning disabilities and lower
IQ’s.


Usually, Gallzo would have to surrender her son’s toy to be destroyed in a lab to figure
out what its made of, but today a new type of technology is being used. Bill Radosevich,
of the company Thermo Scientific is going to zap the plastic sword with an X-ray gun
his company’s designed. In the first 5 seconds, the toy’s elements pop up on a computer
screen:


“About 6000 parts per million of zinc, we’re seeing a little bit of copper, that’s probably
part of the coloring….I’m definitely not seeing lead.”


Gallzo was lucky, her son’s favorite toy is free of lead. But beside Radosevich, is a
suitcase filled with toys that didn’t pass the test. On display are low brand or no brand
items, like plastic teething rings, a simple black snorkel, children’s jewelry and marti gras
beads. All objects kids have been known to suck and chew on. Radosevich says they all
contain lead in excess of 600 parts per million, the American limit for consumer
products:


“I’m less concerned about a hair piece than I am about something that’s supposed to be put into a
child’s mouth.”


Radosevich’s testing device looks like a Faser gun from an old Star Trek show. It uses x-
ray technology and it’s not cheap, they go for 30,000 dollars a piece. Radosevich
says metal industries and archaeologists already use the device for different purposes, but
he thinks product importers and toy retailers might be interested in them too. Michael
Zigenhagan, owns the toystore Play Matters and he says testing toys for lead is not his
responsibility:


“I don’t think that’s within the scope of a retailer’s capabilities. We wouldn’t be
asking national big box retailers to create their own testing arms for the products they
carry. That’s ultimately the manufacturer’s job to do that.”


But the way toys are manufactured in China is a tangled supply chain, with various
components of a toy coming from different factories. Rachel Weintrub is with the
Consumer Federation of America. She says importers are putting too much trust in the
manufacturers they contract with. Her group is lobbying Congress to require US
companies, such as Mattel, to make sure a toy’s components aren’t contaminated before they’re assembled in China:


“If it were required that paint be tested for safety before the paint were used on the
product, this huge harm would be prevented.”


Weintrub says waiting until a product is in the supply chain and issuing a recall isn’t
completely effective. She says recalls never get all the defective products back, and
ultimately that leaves toys in the marketplace and children in potential harm.


For the Environment Report, I’m Lisa Ann Pinkerton.

Related Links