Author: Suzanne Elston

Flat empty rooftops are one of the last urban frontiers, and with newgreen roof technology they can be turned into a force for cleaner air,cleaner water, and cooler and healthier cities. Great Lakes RadioConsortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that thanks to this newtechnology, things are beginning to look up in Toronto:

Transcript

Flat empty rooftops are one of the last urban frontiers. And with new
green roof technology they can be turned into a force for cleaner
air, cleaner water, and cooler and healthier cities. Great Lakes
Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says that thanks to this
new technology, things are beginning to look up in Toronto.

Chicago was first. Last year a 38,000 square foot garden was planted
on the roof of Chicago’s City Hall. And now Toronto, Canada’s largest
city, is going even further to promote the idea. Besides greening
City Hall’s rooftop, city officials have formed an interesting
partnership with industry and environmental groups. The goal is to
not only plant rooftop gardens, but to make those gardens accessible
to the public and to promote the idea in the marketplace. So that
when builders are planning new projects or renovating old ones, green
rooftops become the preferred option.

And they should be – for a whole pile of reasons. Take urban sprawl.
In the city of Toronto, for example, the rooftops on large buildings
comprise more than 6% of the total land area. With green roof
technology that wasted space could be transformed into opportunities
to reduce energy consumption and cool the air.

This is how they work: According to Environment Canada, on a hot
summer day, the temperature of traditional flat rooftops can soar to
140 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s hot enough to fry an egg. By
contrast, a living, grassed rooftop won’t get any hotter than about
77 degrees and that means cooler buildings and less heat radiated
into the city. With enough green roofs, the entire temperature of a
city can be brought down. A 3 to 6 degree reduction in temperature,
could translates into a 10% reduction in energy use for all
buildings. Again, according research done by Environment Canada, the
shading effect of a green roof alone can cuts cooling costs by 20 to
30% for a one-story structure.

And that’s just the tip of the green iceberg. These living rooftops
temporarily hold as much as 50 to 70% of the storm water that falls
on them. The plants and the growing medium filter out pollutants like
lead and cadmium from the water before sending it on its way. This
reduces storm water contamination – a major source of water pollution
in the Great Lakes. The plants also filter out air borne pollutants
like nitrous oxides and volatile organic compounds.

Another benefit is that green roofs protect the underlying structure
of the roof itself, so it tends to last two to three times longer.
And finally, in my view they’re just plain nicer than flat old black
rooftops. Green rooftops can transform largely wasted rooftop spaces
into beautiful urban gardens for employees, day care centers and
recreational spaces for the public. They can even be used to grow
food. Talk about a win-win idea.

So I think it’s high time we followed in Toronto and Chicago’s
footsteps and started looking up to a great, green idea.

Related Links

• </a>For more information about green roofs, visit <a href=’http://www.peck.ca’>www.peck.ca</a>

Last month (October), Toronto announced that it was backing out of aplan to dump its garbage in an abandoned open pit mine in NorthernOntario. Environmentalists thought they’d won a decade long battle toprotect communities from being dumped on by Canada’s largest city. Butthey were shocked when Toronto officials decided to ship the garbage toMichigan instead. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator SuzanneElston wonders why one community’s victory has to be another community’sdefeat:

Transcript

Last month, Toronto announced that it was backing out of a plan to
dump its garbage in an abandoned open pit mine in Northern Ontario.
Environmentalists thought they’d won a decade long battle to protect
communities from being dumped on by Canada’s largest city. But they
were shocked when Toronto officials decided to ship the garbage to
Michigan instead. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne
Elston wonders why one community’s victory has to be another
community’s defeat.

They literally danced in the streets. After 10 years of fighting,
they won on a technicality. Toronto City Council had agreed to ship
more than a million tons of garbage by rail to the Adams Mine every
year and dump it. Despite the economic boom that the plan could have
provided for the economically depressed area, people fought it. And
with good reason. The abandoned open pit mine is at the headwaters of
a number of river systems. Without any clay liner, the garbage could
have contaminated groundwater for hundreds of miles.

But Toronto officials were determined to go ahead until they tried to
finalize the details of the contract. When the dump owner, Rail Cycle
North, failed to accept all liability for unforeseen cost increases,
the city pulled out of the deal.

Throughout the decade long process, environmentalists have argued
that dumping on Toronto’s neighbors wasn’t the solution. They said
that aggressive waste reduction and recycling programs were a better
answer. But immediately after the Adams Mine announcement, officials
named Michigan as the city’s next best choice for dumping its trash.
Michigan already receives 500,000 tons of Toronto’s industrial and
commercial wastes every year.

The decision has enraged environmentalists on both sides of the
Canada/U.S. border. And so now Toronto’s Mayor, Mel Lastman, wants us
to believe that he’s finally got the message. Lastman has promised
that if he’s re-elected, he’ll personally head up a waste reduction
task force.

I smell a rat, a really big garbage rat. The greatest selling point
of the Adams Mine proposal was that Toronto wasn’t required to
guarantee the volume of garbage they were dumping. What this meant
was that the city could increase its recycling efforts, and not have
to pay any penalties to Rail Cycle North. With the Michigan contract,
Toronto will have to agree to ship a minimum amount of garbage, or
face increased costs. This will probably stop any significant
reduction programs before they even get off the ground.

What I still don’t understand is why one environmental victory has to
become a defeat for someplace else. Toronto should be shamed into
taking care of its own problems instead of dumping them on another
community or another country.

If city officials thought the Michigan decision would at least get
the Adams Mine folks off their backs, they were wrong. Northern
activists have gone on record stating that this latest plan is a bad
one and they’ve begun working with Michigan environmentalists to stop
it. Given how physically, emotionally and financially exhausted they
were after their own battle, this support is quite remarkable. I keep
hoping that the folks at Toronto’s City Hall might learn from their
example that we all have to work together to solve our garbage
problems.

An international panel of experts recently announced that man-madepollution is having a much greater effect on global warming thanpreviously suspected. Despite that, the issue of global warming hasreceived very little attention during the presidential campaign. ButGreat Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston says weshouldn’t be looking to the men who would be president for leadership onthis hot issue:

Transcript

An international panel of experts recently announced that man-made pollution
is having a much greater affect on global warming than previously suspected.
Despite that, the issue of global warming has received very little attention during the
presidential campaign. But Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston
says we shouldn’t be looking to the men who would be President for leadership on this
hot issue.

It was predictable enough. Democratic Presidential Candidate Al Gore managed to give
the perception of being green, without ever really trying the color on. As a senator, Gore
penned the best-seller Earth in the Balance that won him a reputation for being an
environmental visionary. But during his eight years in the White House, Gore has
done little to put his thoughts into action. The Clinton-Gore administration’s record on
climate change is particularly poor. In 1997, the world’s leaders gathered in Kyoto, Japan
to sign an international agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon
dioxide the primary cause of global warming. Three years later, the U.S. still hasn’t
ratified the agreement, which is referred to as the Kyoto Protocol.

But Gore still wants us to believe he’ll be the environmental
president. Last week he personally contacted the president of
Colombia and told him he was concerned about the effect that plans to
drill for oil in the rainforest would have on local tribes. That’s
tough talk from a man whose family holds about a half a million
dollars of stock in a U.S. based company involved in the project.

Republican George Bush is even worse. When David Letterman recently
grilled him about air pollution. Bush’s big commitment was to say,
“sooner or later we’re going to have to make a significant change.”
That’s a strong statement from the governor of Texas. According to
the EPA, Texas leads the nation in the number of industrial plants
violating clean air rules.

So the winner is – neither one. But then again, I didn’t expect there
to be a winner. The very nature of government forces leaders to
compromise their values until there’s virtually nothing left.

But it doesn’t really matter on the grand scale of things. The United
States may be the most powerful nation in the world, but according to
the U.S. Institute for Policy Studies, 51 of the top 100 economies
are companies – not countries.

Which is precisely why a recent announcement by seven of the world’s
major corporations was so significant. They’re voluntarily committing
to make significant reductions in their greenhouse gas emissions
ahead of any government requirements. The companies have pledged to
reduce their combined emissions more than 20% below 1990 levels. This
announcement follows on the heels of similar ones made earlier this
year by Polaroid, Johnson & Johnson and IBM. They’ve all promised to
cut emissions by 25% below 1994 levels.

Compare all this with the Kyoto agreement which the government has
yet to ratify. It’s only asking for a reduction of 6% in carbon
dioxide emissions below 1990 levels. So Bush or Gore? It doesn’t
really matter. They’re both fiddling around while the planet slowly
burns.

The sinking of military ships – both in peacetime and in war creates amyriad of problems. In addition to the strategic loss, they often posesignificant environmental threats. The sinking of the Russiansubmarine, Kursk, and concern over its nuclear reactor is a recentexample of this. But as Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentatorSuzanne Elston has discovered, a new project plans to deliberately sinka Canadian naval vessel in Lake Ontario to help improve the marineenvironment:

Transcript

The sinking of military ships – both in peacetime and in war – creates a myriad of
problems. In addition to the strategic loss, they often pose significant environmental
threats. The sinking of the Russian submarine, Kursk, and concern over its nuclear
reactor is a recent example of this. But as Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator
Suzanne Elston has discovered, a new project plans to deliberately sink a Canadian naval
vessel in the Lake Ontario to help improve the marine environment.

The project gives a whole new meaning to the old phrase, ‘turning
swords into ploughshares.” A group of scuba divers wants to sink an
old naval vessel and turn it into a multi-purpose artificial reef.
The decommissioned naval destroyer Nipigon will provide a habitat for
fish and aquatic vegetation, a hotspot for anglers and an interesting
site for scuba divers. The vessel will also become an underwater
classroom for marine archeology and environmental studies students,
as well as a research site for biologists and ecologists. The Nipigon
will even provide an interesting underwater location for movie and
television productions.

What’s nice about the plan is that the wreck site will be free and
open to everyone. And although the Nipigon is A Canadian ship, going
down in Canadian waters, the project is gaining international
attention. In fact, much of the funding comes from Project AWARE – a
California based scuba association dedicated to preserving the
aquatic environment.

It may seem ironic that this project falls so closely on the heels of
the Kursk sinking. So much international attention has been focused
on the possibility of raising the radioactive ship and her dead crew.
But while The Nipigon will be the first Canadian warship to be
deliberately sunk in the Great Lakes, there have already been several
successful sinkings off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. Last year
the Canadian warship Yukon was decommissioned and bought by a San
Diego based group. It was sunk off the coast of California in June.

Right now, the only hold-up to the Nipigon project is red tape. Once
the ship is decommissioned and any environmental hazards such as fuel
oil are removed, it can then be sold and shipped up the St. Lawrence
to Lake Ontario. Then the fun part begins. A demolition expert will
carefully set charges above and below the waterline and then, boom.
Down she goes. So if all goes well, this newest Great Lakes
attraction will be open about this time next year. Anyone for a swim?

A new U.S. report documents a disturbing link between toxic pollutionand learning and developmental disabilities in children. The report,entitled Polluting our Future, echoes similar findings released lastmonth by a team of Canadian researchers. The Canadian report claims aconnection between environmental contaminants such as pesticides, smogand food additives and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder andother learning disabilities. For Great Lakes Radio Consortiumcommentator Suzanne Elston, the studies mark the end of a fifteen-yearsearch for answers:

Transcript

A new U.S. report documents a disturbing link between toxic pollution
and learning and developmental disabilities in children. The report,
entitled Polluting our Future, echoes similar findings released last
month by a team of Canadian researches. The Canadian reports claims a
connection between environmental contaminants such as pesticides,
smog and food additives and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder
and other learning disabilities. For Great Lakes Radio Consortium
commentator Suzanne Elston, the studies mark the end of a
fifteen-year search for answers.

Almost right from the minute he was born, our son Matthew was a busy
boy. By the time he’d started school, he was quite a handful. At ten,
he was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or
ADHD.

We’ve suspected all along that Matthew’s behavior was somehow linked
with a chemical imbalance. For years I couldn’t figure out how this
could’ve happened. When I was pregnant, I wouldn’t put anything in
my mouth or near my body that could possibly harm my baby – or so I
thought. I avoided everything from second-hand smoke to household
cleaners. I even went nine months without a cup of coffee. When it
came time to deliver, it was strictly au natural. As an infant,
Matthew was fed exclusively on breast milk until he graduated to our
own organically grown vegetables. Over the years, we’ve tried to
eliminate food additives and other possible chemical triggers from
his diet. In short, we couldn’t point to a single factor that could
be causing his behavior, or help to improve it. We even tried
Ritalin, with little success.

Now these two new reports have finally given us some insight into
what may have happened. Despite my precautions during pregnancy, I
was unknowingly exposed to all the environmental contaminants that
pollute the air and water in the Great Lakes basin.

As much as our son’s behavior is difficult to live with, his symptoms
are mild compared with some of the disabilities linked with
neurological toxins. According to the studies, mental retardation,
birth defects and autism are caused, at least in part, by toxic
exposure. The U.S. report says that disabilities in more than 360,000
children can be directly attributed to chemical exposure, and that
figure could go much higher. In total, 12 million U.S. children – or
one out of every six kids – has some kind of developmental, learning
or behavioral disability.

On a national scale, this is nothing short of a major environmental
disaster. We are permanently damaging our most precious resource. But
for the families who struggle with these children day to day, the
question becomes, “What now?’ After all these years of searching,
finally finding the possible cause of Matthew’s uncontrollable
behavior is cold comfort. Despite our best intentions in the world,
the damage has already been done.

Walking for fitness or fun is a great way to rediscover the worldaround us. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston haslearned that how we view that world can also be colored by whom we walkwith:

Transcript

Walking for fitness or fun is a great way to rediscover the world
around us. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston
has learned that how we view that world can also be colored by whom
we walk with.

I’ve recently rediscovered the joy of walking, thanks to our dog,
Jessie.

Jessie’s taught me a lot. Retrievers have very sensitive noses, which
they like to keep close to the pavement. By watching her as she
snuffles along, I’m seeing things that I’ve never noticed before.

For example, our walks take us along rural roads and through a
neighboring subdivision, so we get to see a variety of flowers. While
some of the landscaped gardens are really quite beautiful, they can’t
come close to the riot of color and scents that wildflowers display
at this time of year. I wouldn’t have even noticed the wildflowers if
Jessie hadn’t tried to chase after the butterflies that flutter
around them.

I’m looking in ditches a lot more, too. And what I’ve noticed is that
there are hundreds of pop cans and bottles littering the countryside,
but I rarely see an empty beer bottle. I don’t think it’s because
beer drinkers are more responsible either. Where I live there isn’t a
deposit on pop containers, but there is on beer. I get the feeling
that a simple five-cent deposit on all pop cans would clean up the
ditches far faster than any community recycling blitz.

I never quite appreciated the value of trees until I walked with a
panting dog. Even on the hottest day, walking under the shady
branches of a tree immediately cools you down. I don’t know why
everybody doesn’t have a yard full of them. They do more to help the
environment that any other living thing that I can think of. They
take in carbon dioxide, a major contributor to global warming. They
store the carbon and release oxygen back into the air. They provide
protection against ultraviolet radiation and they cool the pavement
and the air. As few as three properly planted trees around a home can
cut air-conditioning bills by up to 50 percent in the summer and help
reduce heating costs in winter. No wonder dogs love trees so much.

The best part of walking Jessie is that I’ve learned that heaven’s
under our feet as well as over our heads. For those who care to look,
there’s an entire universe laid out at our feet. For the first time,
I’m noticing the tiny insects that scurry along and the valiant
wildflowers that take root in the cracks of the sidewalk. Jessie
flushes out beautiful yellow finches and tugs on her leash when she
sees sparrows hopping along the pavement in search of breakfast. When
we walk first thing in the morning, the sunlight dances on the
dew-soaked grass and makes it glisten like emerald velvet. The
pebbles on the side of the road glitter like precious jewels. This is
the kingdom of the early morning walker and Jessie and I are its
queens.

The ITER (pronounced ‘eater’) project is an international plan to buildthe world’s first fusion reactor. One of the preferred sites is in theGreat Lakes basin – an area already saturated with nuclear facilities,waste sites and reactors. Proponents of the ITER project believe thatelectricity generated by fusion could be the long-term energy solutionfor the world. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elstonbelieves that we shouldn’t rule out other options:

Transcript

The ITER (pronounced ‘eater’) project is an international plan to
build the world’s first fusion reactor. One of the preferred sites is
in the Great Lakes basin – an area already saturated with nuclear
facilities, waste sites and reactors. Proponents of the ITER project
believe that electricity generated by fusion could be the long-term
energy solution for the world. Great Lakes Radio Consortium
commentator Suzanne Elston believes that we shouldn’t rule out other
options.

It’s really hard to swim upstream – particularly when every other
fish in the river is going with the flow. The problem started when I
first heard about the ITER project. ITER stands for International
Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor – and my community has suddenly
become the focus of a lot of attention because of it. A group of
international scientists is looking for a location to build the
experimental reactor, and my hometown in on the shortlist. Everyone
from the mayor on down thinks it’s a great idea.

I have to admit, my immediate reaction wasn’t quite so enthusiastic.
The ITER project is fighting forty years of nuclear history. There’s
the unfulfilled promise of power too cheap to meter. And there’s the
growing pile of nuclear waste that we still have figured out how to
dispose of.

But the ITER project is supposed to be different. It burns waste from
nuclear fission plants as a starter fuel for the fusion reactor. In
theory, once a reaction is achieved, only lithium and hydrogen should
be required to sustain it. If it works, fusion could be the ultimate
renewable energy source.

It sounds promising. And it’s also a long way off. Even the most
optimistic predictions say that commercially available fusion power
is probably 50 years away. We don’t have 50 years.

However, I think the bigger question becomes do we really want to tie
ourselves to yet another mega-source of electricity? Nuclear power,
large hydroelectric dams and coal-fired generation all have a couple
of things in common. They cost lots of money to build and they need
distribution networks to deliver. Fusion would be no different.

So instead of putting all our eggs in one energy basket, why not give
everyone their own basket? Let them create their own energy.
Experiments in fuel cell technology, for example, are showing
promising results. Test cars are already using small fuel cell power
plants. And the only by-product is water.

By simply installing a small fuel cell in the basement, every house
in the neighborhood could be energy self-sufficient. And fuel cells
aren’t the only technology that offer us this kind of freedom.
Imagine what this could mean. Goodbye grid. So-long overhead wires.
Goodbye to the fear of cancer from electromagnetic radiation.
Farewell to smog from coal plants and see-you-later radioactive
waste. Now that’s where we should be investing our money and our best
scientific minds.

There has been a fair bit of attention focused on protecting the natural habitat of endangered species in the Great Lakes region. Meanwhile, less threatened animals are routinely displaced or destroyed by development. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator SuzanneElston tells the story of one creature that got caught on the edge:

Transcript

There has been a fair bit of attention focused on protecting the natural habitat of
endangered species in the Great Lakes region. Meanwhile, less threatened
animals are routinely displaced or destroyed by development. Great Lakes Radio
Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston tells the story of one creature that got
caught on the edge.

One of the nicest things about living in the country is the neighbors – and I don’t
mean the two-legged kind, either. Over the years we’ve shared the land around
us with everything from a deer family to a Great Horned Owl. This past winter, a
lone coyote regularly came by our house to visit. But by the spring we hadn’t
seen the coyote for a couple months, until she showed up on our front lawn late
one evening.

At first my husband and I barely recognized it. Most of her fur was gone and her
once beautiful ears lay limply against the side of her head. It didn’t take a
veterinarian to figure out that the coyote was seriously ill with mange. It’s a skin
disease caused by parasitic mites that eventually makes an animal’s fur fall out.
Since the coyote was obviously too sick to be treated, the only humane thing to
do was to call the local township and have the animal put out of its misery.

The trapper they sent knew all about our coyote. Her den had recently been
destroyed by a new housing development near us. She’d been hanging around a
local schoolyard for the past year, living off lunches that had been thrown away
by the school kids.

I suddenly felt very sorry for the coyote. It was almost as if she had come to us
for help, and our response was to have her killed. I also knew from talking to the
local farmers, that they certainly wouldn’t be mourning her loss. In the wild,
coyotes are natural predators that play a major role in helping control other
species and culling out sickly animals. But in farming communities they’re an
unwanted pest. In my small community alone, coyotes destroy over a hundred
thousand dollars worth of livestock every year.

I also know that coyotes aren’t endangered. And as far as unwanted wildlife
goes, they’re right up there with skunks and raccoons. But I couldn’t help but
think that this was their home, long before we got here. We move in, take over
their habitat, and then expect them to behave. I’m quite sure that if a loud,
aggressive neighbor moved in next door to me, I’d probably act like a coyote and
make a pest of myself, too.

The irony is, we build housing developments near the country so we can be a
part of it. We give these communities goofy names like Cedar
Creek and Countryside Homes – names that make us feel a part of nature. But as
soon as nature becomes less predictable than our thermostatically controlled
homes, we try to control it or get rid of it.

It took a couple of days, but the coyote was finally caught. As she was loaded
into the back of the trapper’s truck, I will never forget what I saw. Her decimated,
hairless body shivered in fear and cold, and her head was bowed with the weight
of her disease. But it was the look in her eyes that will haunt me forever.

As the trapper’s truck pulled out of our driveway, I sat down and wept.

HOST TAG:

Suzanne Elston is a syndicated columnist living in Courtice,
Ontario. She comes to us by way of the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium.

A recent Canadian study shows that U.S. shipments of hazardous
industrial waste into Canada have increased dramatically in recent
years. In 1994, it was 100,000 tons. In 1998, shipments increased to
more than 235,000 tons. The majority of this waste comes from nearby
Great Lakes states, with 37 percent coming from Michigan alone. Meanwhile, the
City of Toronto is running out of places to put its residential
garbage. Ironically, landfills in Michigan are topping the city’s list
of options. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston
wonders if it isn’t time to stop this trans-border trash trade:

For years many well-intentioned Americans have been patiently sorting
their glass and paper, before placing it on the curb for recycling.
Recycling, once looked down upon, has become fashionable. As a result,
materials that once went to the landfill are now being recycled into new
products. But as Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne
Elston says, all that effort just isn’t enough: