Keeping Chemicals a Secret

  • Drilling for natural gas includes pumping water and chemicals at high pressure into the ground to force out pockets of gas (Photo courtesy of Argonne National Laboratories)

The federal law that protects drinking water allows companies drilling for natural gas to inject chemicals into the ground. The exemption for gas drilling operations also allows the companies to keep the chemicals they use a secret. Conrad Wilson reports environmentalists want the exemption removed:

Transcript

The federal law that protects drinking water allows companies drilling for natural gas to inject chemicals into the ground. The exemption for gas drilling operations also allows the companies to keep the chemicals they use a secret. Conrad Wilson reports environmentalists want the exemption removed:

For decades, drilling for natural gas includes pumping water and chemicals at high pressure into the ground to force out pockets of gas.

Environmental groups believe the chemicals are contaminating wells and aquifers here in the western U.S. Now gas drilling is moving east to places closer to cities such as Philadelphia and New York.

Several Democratic Members of Congress have introduced legislation to repeal the exemption in the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Randy Udall is a co-founder of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil-USA, an environmental group. He says as more gas is found, people in the East can expect more drilling.

“For better or worse, whether you like it or not, as time goes on, were going to be drilling in places where people are living.”

The oil and natural gas industry says the chemicals they force into the ground are “trade secrets.” They say the process is safe.

For The Environment Report, I’m Conrad Wilson.

Related Links

Predicting Wildfires in a Warmer World

  • This wildfire ignited along Idaho Highway 55 and was started by people. Scientists say as the climate warms, fires like this one will become common place in many parts of the world. (Photo by Sadie Babits)

Climate change has already brought
warmer temperatures, rising sea
levels and melting glaciers. Now,
researchers believe global warming
will cause major shifts in wildfire
patterns around the world. As Sadie
Babits reports, scientists hope to
predict where future wildfires will
light up:

Transcript

Climate change has already brought
warmer temperatures, rising sea
levels and melting glaciers. Now,
researchers believe global warming
will cause major shifts in wildfire
patterns around the world. As Sadie
Babits reports, scientists hope to
predict where future wildfires will
light up:

Trying to predict where wildfires are likely to start decades from now, is
kind of like getting a full body scan.

(sound of medical scanner)

Except instead of a medical scanner, scientists scanned the earth using
satellite data, climate models and the history of present day wildfires to
map out global wildfire patterns.

“The impacts of climate change on wildfires are expected to be widespread
around the world.”

Katherine Hayhoe is a climate scientist at Texas Tech University. She’s part
of a group of scientists that has for the first time, tried to project where fire
hotspots will crop up around the world. She says they found that climate
change will affect wildfire patterns.

Hotter temperatures and rain and snow coming at different times in the
year or perhaps not at all, will mean forests and grasslands will dry out
quicker – becoming tinder boxes for fire.

In the next 30 years, scientists believe that the Western U.S. will continue
to see catastrophic fires like the recent blaze in Santa Barbara, which
destroyed 80 homes.

In the next 60 years, they predict wildfires will increase in the Corn Belt and
spread into the East Coast.

Hayhoe says having an idea of how wildfire patterns will shift will help
communities better prepare.

“We can never eliminate the risk of climate change entirely but by making
wise choices and planning strategically we can minimize those risks.”

Some communities are already taking steps to prevent wildfire. The city of
Bend, Oregon was one of the first in the country to launch a public
education campaign to get homeowners to fire proof their homes. The
program, called FireFree, started more than a decade ago, after a massive
wildfire burned nineteen homes and scorched thousands of acres.

“It was something that scarred our community.”

Gary Marshall is the deputy chief of Bend’s Fire Department.

“We have this history of people wanting to live outside the urban area and
live out in rural areas, where they can see the deer and be out in the trees
and live that lifestyle that most Americans who move out to the West want
to be a part of that.”

Bend lies in what’s known as wildfire alley. Every year there are dozens of
fires that crop up either from lightning strikes or from people. The flames
are fed by dried out grasses and forests so dense you can’t see through
them. Add homes to the mix and you have a recipe for disaster not just
here but throughout the West.

But Marshall says the Fire Free program is working.

(sound of a truck driving on a dirt road)

County forester Joe Stutler and Gary Marshall drive me through
neighborhoods outside Bend. We stop first at an upscale suburb called
Coldera Springs. Everyone here has volunteered to fire proof their new
homes.

But just down the road, there’s a much older suburb and a lot of trees that
have been thinned out.

Sadie: “You can’t see through the trees it’s so dense.”

Joe: “You can’t walk through.”

Gary: “And a firefighter won’t go in there. You’d write that off. So if you
don’t take care of it, the fire will.”

That’s a picture that climate scientist Katherine Hayhoe hopes to avoid.
She says having a long term view of where wildfires might pop up could
help communities to start now and follow Bend’s lead.

It took Bend years to get most of the homeowners here to take
responsibility, and give their homes a fighting change to survive a
devastating blaze.

For The Environment Report, I’m Sadie Babits.

Related Links

Phantom Traffic Jams

  • A phantom traffic jam is when everyone slows down or stops, but starts to go again inexplicably (Photo source: Crazytales at Wikimedia Commons)

According the the last report from
the Texas Transportation Institute,
traffic congestion in the US causes
more than four-billion lost hours stuck
in traffic and nearly three-billion
gallons of wasted fuel. Lester Graham
reports mathmeticians have found – on
paper – one type of traffic jam looks
something like a bomb going off:

Transcript

According the the last report from
the Texas Transportation Institute,
traffic congestion in the US causes
more than four-billion lost hours stuck
in traffic and nearly three-billion
gallons of wasted fuel. Lester Graham
reports mathmeticians have found – on
paper – one type of traffic jam looks
something like a bomb going off:

Phantom traffic jams are frustrating. You know the kind – traffic slows downs or completely stops, and when you finally get to the end, there’s no wreck, no closed lane – nothing.

Mathematicians at MIT say these phantom jams are a lot like detonation waves produced by explosions.

Morris Flynn is the lead author of the report published in the online edition of Physical Review E.

“You have a single person who taps on their brakes. The driver behind them will over-react, hit their brakes just a little bit harder than the person in front. And this disturbance is just cascaded all the way back so that eventually you get this very rapid deceleration.”

And, phantom traffic jam.

Solutions: more lanes on the highway, and automated signs that warn drivers about slowed traffic ahead.

Or, get more people on mass transit.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Sea Levels Threaten Coastal Towns (Part Two)

  • A living shoreline near the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. The native grasses and sandy shore provide habitat for terrapins, the University of Maryland mascot. (Photo by Tamara Keith)

Scientists are pretty certain climate change is going to cause the sea level to rise. It’s
happening already, actually. In communities around the Chesapeake Bay, people are
getting a sneak preview. Tamara Keith reports some people there are trying to work with
nature rather than resist it:

Transcript

Scientists are pretty certain climate change is going to cause the sea level to rise. It’s
happening already, actually. In communities around the Chesapeake Bay, people are
getting a sneak preview. Tamara Keith reports some people there are trying to work with
nature rather than resist it:

(sound of kids planting)

It’s been raining in Woodland Beach. The community is just off of the Chesapeake Bay
in Maryland. The ground here is so soft you sink into it. Mud is everywhere. And that’s
just fine with the volunteers planting native grasses on a sloping hillside.

Stephen Hult is trying to keep things in order.

“And when we plant them we want them all the way down. I’m telling everyone twice.”

Hult heads up shoreline restoration projects for the local property owners association.
And there’s a lot of shoreline to restore.

“The shoreline, in parts of the community since the 1930s, have eroded 20 feet. Year to
year, one barely notices, but if you look at aerial maps of what it used to be like
compared to what it is, it really is quite dramatic.”

There’s been tons of erosion here. The land all along the mid-Atlantic coast is also
slowly sinking. Combine that with global sea level rise and you get erosion in overdrive.

Hult says the community is trying to restore the beach with rock and dirt and sand and
grasses to hold it all together. This is what’s called a living shoreline.

“We have now, with this project it will be well over half a mile of living shorelines that
we’ve installed.”

It’s a relatively new concept, a more natural approach to the gnawing problem of
shoreline erosion. Living shorelines create buffer between the water and homes. They are
kinda like the tidal wetlands that used to be here – before property owners started building
sea walls, also called bulkheads.

Jana Davis is associate director of the Chesapeake Bay Trust. It’s one of the organizations
funding this shoreline restoration. And Davis also happens to live here.

“It’s a wonderful alternative that provides just as good shoreline protection while also
providing a lot of really important habitat benefits that a bulkhead or rock sea wall does
not provide.”

Good for wildlife, and she says, it’s adaptive in the face of sea level rise.

“If sea level were to rise another foot, for example. The marsh could kind of migrate
inland, whereas if you had a bulkhead obviously there’s no migration because it can’t
move.”

But most of the people with bulkheads are NOT buying it. They want to protect their
property from the sinking land and rising water, and a lot of them don’t think a bunch of
rocks and grass are going to cut it.

Kevin Smith is chief of restoration services for the Maryland Department of Natural
Resources.

“There’s many places you can go and look at miles of shoreline and not see any natural
shoreline at all. It’s all armored off.”

Smith met me at a nature center along the bay. A few years ago, a stretch of bulkhead
here was replaced with a living shoreline. The natural ebb and flow of these shorelines
has made some property owners skeptical. They want the shoreline to stay put.

“If these types of projects don’t protect that shoreline from erosion, then homeowners are
not going to want to do it.”

But Smith insists these projects do work, and long term they’re going to be more
sustainable and more flexible than bulkheads – which over time will lose the battle
against the constant pounding of the rising sea.

For The Environment Report, I’m Tamara Keith.

Related Links

Report Warns of Climate Effects in US

  • The report summarizes what the scientists have been finding (Image courtesy of the US Global Change Research Program)

Scientists say the effects of human-caused climate change can no longer be ignored. Their findings are part of a national report just released. Sadie Babits reports it outlines the current and future impacts of climate change in the US:

Transcript

Scientists say the effects of human-caused climate change can no longer be ignored. Their findings are part of a national report just released. Sadie Babits reports it outlines the current and future impacts of climate change in the US:

The U.S. Global Change Research Program’s report summarizes what scientists have been finding.

As temperatures warm, sea levels are rising, crop production is changing and hurricanes are getting worse.

Katherine Hayhoe is one of the report’s authors. She says we all need to curb greenhouse gas emissions and learn to adapt.

“So we need to figure out how to best prepare for the change that is coming.”

The report comes out while Congress is considering a major bill that would cap greenhouse gas emissions and reduce them over time.

But Hayhoe says the timing is just a coincidence.

Hayhoe says she does hope the report helps inform the debate in Washington.

For The Environment Report, I’m sAdie Babits.

Related Links

Sea Levels Threaten Coastal Towns (Part One)

  • The boardwalk in Ocean City, Maryland. Before beach replenishment, you could get your feet wet standing underneath the boardwalk. Now, as you can see, the water is 200 feet away. (Photo by Tamara Keith)

It’s beach weather – and along the mid-Atlantic one of the most popular beaches is Ocean
City, Maryland. For years, engineers have been battling back the ocean to save the beach
and the town. And as Tamara Keith reports, that fight is only going to get tougher and
more expensive if predictions of sea level rise from climate change become a reality:

Transcript

It’s beach weather – and along the mid-Atlantic one of the most popular beaches is Ocean
City, Maryland. For years, engineers have been battling back the ocean to save the beach
and the town. And as Tamara Keith reports, that fight is only going to get tougher and
more expensive if predictions of sea level rise from climate change become a reality:

When the sea level rises, Ocean City feels it. It’s on the front lines – a barrier island on
the edge of the Atlantic.

(sounds of water)

Terry McGean is the city engineer for a town he describes as a working class resort.

“Our industry is tourism, and the real reason people come here is the beach.”

But in the 1980s, that beach was reduced to a narrow strip. Not so today, all thanks to a
massive, and expensive, beach replenishment project. In 1991 countless tons of sand
were brought in, dunes were built. But that wasn’t the end of it.

To keep up with erosion, McGean says the beach here at Ocean City has already been re-
nourished 4 times.

“Approximately every 4 years we’re doing a re-nourishment project. To give you an idea
of the scale, that’s 100,000 truck loads of material that we’ll put on here. Though it
doesn’t actually come on a truck? No. It’s pumped in a dredge from out in the ocean.”

It is a constant fight, because the waves keep coming, keep pulling the sand back out to
sea. Scientists say this is partially just normal erosion. But some of it at least can be
blamed on global climate change and sea level rise. Over time, they say, the share of the
problem caused by climate change will grow.

“If you hadn’t done the beach replenishment do you have any sense of what this would
look like right now. There probably would have been no public beach left in many of
these areas.”

So far fending off the sea has cost $90-million, split amongst local, state and federal tax
dollars. But engineers estimate some $240-million in storm damage has been prevented.

“Holding back the sea is an economic proposition. If you’re willing to spend the money,
the sand exists to elevate any given barrier island.”

Jim Titus is the project manager for sea level rise at the Environmental Protection
Agency. And he’s been sounding the alarm about climate change for years. And he says
policy makers and the public will eventually have to decide which beaches, which
communities are worth saving.

“The challenge for communities like Ocean City is to persuade everyone else that they
are one of those cities that are too important to give up. And then to get their residents to
cooperate in doing what it takes to do to gradually elevate the entire community with a
rising sea.”

But if you think in geologic time, like University of Maryland professor Michael Kearney
does, there isn’t a whole lot of hope for barrier islands like Ocean City.

“It’s essentially a pile of sand. There’s really nothing permanent about it.”

Kearney studies coastal processes.

“The long term prospect of any barrier surviving the projected rates of sea level rise, even
at the moderate rates – the so-called moderate rates, that the IPCC predicted is pretty
slim.”

Ocean City engineer Terry McGean just isn’t buying it. He thinks Ocean City can survive
sea level rise.

“I think that we can design towards it and we can probably build towards it and with
responsible actions we can live with it.”

As long as there’s enough sand and money to keep it going.

For The Environment Report, I’m Tamara Keith.

Related Links

Doctors Release Statement on Urban Sprawl

  • The statement sites urban sprawl as one of the main causes of childhood obesity because often kids can’t walk to parks or schools (Photo courtesy of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

Turns out there’s more to childhood
obesity that junk food and bad genes.
A national group of doctors places
some of the blame on urban design.
Jennifer Guerra has more:

Transcript

Turns out there’s more to childhood
obesity that junk food and bad genes.
A national group of doctors places
some of the blame on urban design.
Jennifer Guerra has more:

The American Academy of Pediatrics puts out so-called ‘policy statements’ all the time. Usually they’re for other doctors to read.

But this time, the doctors group is taking aim at lawmakers.

The group issued a statement in Pediatrics Magazine that basically says urban sprawl is one of the main causes of childhood obesity because often kids can’t walk to parks or schools.

June Tester is the lead author. She says the statement was a little controversial within the group.

“A lot of time, physicians are too busy or feel uncomfortable about being in the role of an advocate. But it’s a shame, because when physicians are actually motivated enough to speak to legislators, it can actually make a big difference.”

Tester says the response from the urban planning community has been really positive. Now she hopes lawmakers keep the research in mind when it comes time to vote for legislation that will affect a community’s design.

For The Environment Report, I’m Jennifer Guerra.

Related Links

Pitching Diesels as an Eco-Friendly Option

  • VW's Jetta TDI - a diesel that the EPA estimates at 40 miles per gallon (Photo by Julie Grant)

If you’re thinking about buying a cleaner, more fuel-efficient
car, you might think a hybrid is your best option. But some
automakers want people to look at an older technology when
they’re looking for green cars: the diesel engine. Julie Grant
reports:

Transcript

If you’re thinking about buying a cleaner, more fuel-efficient
car, you might think a hybrid is your best option. But some
automakers want people to look at an older technology when
they’re looking for green cars: the diesel engine. Julie Grant
reports:

Lots of automakers make diesel cars – BMW, Ford, General
Motors, Volkswagen. But they sell most of them in Europe,
not the U.S. Diesel engines have a bad rap here.

Just ask Jerry Doble; he used to drive a diesel truck.

“They’re noisy and they’re smelly and they’re hard to start in
the winter. And that’s about it, I guess.”

But Doble hasn’t seen the new diesel cars making their way
from Europe.

Mike Omotoso is an auto industry analyst with JD Power and
Associates.

He says diesel carmakers have lowered their tailpipe
emissions. They’ve put in extensive filtering systems. Plus,
the fuel, itself, is cleaner than it used to be.
Diesel used to have lots of stinky sulfur – up to 500 parts per
million – now it has only 15 parts per million.

But Omotoso says when most Americans think of clean cars,
diesels aren’t the first thing that come to mind.

“When people think of clean vehicles they think of the Prius
first, and then they think of Toyota and they think of Honda
as well. The manufacturers, especially the German
manufacturers, are having to do a job catching up to the
positive publicity of hybrids. So they have to persuade the
American public that diesels can be clean as well.”

That’s why you may have seen those Volkswagen
commercials on TV – where one neighbor has a Prius, and
the other a new Jetta TDI-diesel:

VW: “A TDI set a Guiness World Record – 58 miles per
gallon.”

Prius owner: “58 miles per gallon!”

VW: “But this baby hauls. It’s like errr…errr… What does
your Prius sound like?”

Prius owner: (sound of quietly exhaling)

VW: “Oh. That’s cool.”

There’s a couple of things going on in that commercial.
It’s pushing the diesel as a green car. It’s also trying to
dispel the image of diesels being slow and clunky. They’re
trying to push diesels as green, muscle cars.

At this Volkswagen dealership, salesman Aaron Heinlein
says these commercials are having some success.

He says the only people who used to buy diesels worked
with the railways, in construction, or on farms. But this
week, he sold a TDI Jetta to a dietician.

“She would be the customer that, if she came in four years
ago, I would have said, ‘wow, you want to look at a diesel?
Cool, I’ll show you one.’ Now it’s just, that’s the norm. It’s
the lawyer, it’s the dentist, it’s the traveling salesperson who
is in their car a lot and needs better fuel mileage that you
wouldn’t have seen four years ago.”

Diesels cars still makeup less than 1% of the market.

Americans want power and speed and that’s not how they
think about diesel engines. Things are different in Europe,
where gas is upwards of $8 per gallon and consumers are
focused on good gas mileage.

Auto industry analysts are expecting to see a jump in diesel
sales in the U.S. in the next few years.

But JD Power and Associates doesn’t expect all this
marketing to make a huge dent in American car sales.
They’re forecasting diesel car sales at 4% to 5% of the
market by 2016.

That’s when the new federal fuel standards take effect.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Tuna Farming in the Ocean

  • They call the cages Oceanspheres. They’d have the diameter of half a football field. (Photo courtesy of Hawaii Oceanic Technology)

A company in Hawaii wants to build the world’s first commercial bigeye tuna farm. Bigeye tuna is also known as ahi and it’s a popular fish for sushi. Rebecca Williams has more:

Transcript

A company in Hawaii wants to build the world’s first commercial bigeye tuna farm. Bigeye tuna is also known as ahi and it’s a popular fish for sushi. Rebecca Williams has more:

Bigeye tuna are getting overfished in the wild.

So a company called Hawaii Oceanic Technology wants to raise tuna in giant underwater cages off the coast of Hawaii.

They call the cages Oceanspheres. They’d have the diameter of half a football field.

Bill Spencer is president and CEO of the company. He says they’ll raise 20,000 fish in each cage. The tuna will get up to 100 pounds each.

“They’re typically a schooling type fish so they’d be able to swim around in the Oceansphere so we think that would give them the ability to get the kind of muscle tone that would be appreciated by the consumers.”

There are real concerns about pollution and that fish will escape and spread disease to wild fish.

Spencer says ocean currents will sweep away fish feces so they won’t concentrate, and he says the cages are built so tuna can’t escape.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

The Case of the Disappearing Dolphin

  • A false killer whale, which is actually a type of tropical dolphin, with calf (Photo by Deron Verbeck, courtesy of iamaquatic.com)

Commercial fishing in the oceans of the US has done a lot to reduce
accidentally catching marine mammals such as dolphins. But there are
still problems. Ari Daniel Shapiro reports on concerns about one kind
of tropical dolphin called the false killer whale:

Transcript

Commercial fishing in the oceans of the US has done a lot to reduce
accidentally catching marine mammals such as dolphins. But there are
still problems. Ari Daniel Shapiro reports on concerns about one kind
of tropical dolphin called the false killer whale:

Jim Cook has been a fisherman in Hawaii for 18 years.

“You know, it used to be real simple: catch a fish, sell it, and go
back out and try and catch another one.”

Now he owns a company that operates six fishing vessels. Cook’s
ships catch deep swimming sashimi-grade tuna that ends up in sushi
restaurants across the US. They use a technique called longline fishing.

“We have around 45 miles of mainline to which we attach floaters
and 2200 to 2500 baited hooks.”

“The regulations imposed on the Hawaii longline fishery are
probably the most restrictive regulations on any longline fishery in the
world.”

That’s Bill Robinson. He’s an administrator with the National
Marine Fisheries Service. And these regulations he’s talking about are
meant to reduce bycatch. That means catching marine animals other than
the tuna. As a result of these policies, sea turtle bycatch has dropped
by more than 90-percent and seabird bycatch by 95-percent.

Things are looking up, but now there’s another problem. The numbers of
another kind of animal – the false killer whale – are declining. No one
knows why they’re disappearing. It might be related to longline
fishing, but it’s just not clear.

Robin Baird’s a biologist with Cascadia Research.

“There’s a whole variety of lines of evidence that imply the false
killer whale population around the main Hawaiian islands has declined
dramatically over the last 20 years. And I think it’s clearly the most
serious conservation or management issue for whales and dolphins in
Hawaiian waters today.”

Baird thinks the decline is partly related to fewer numbers of tuna
and other species false killer whales eat. He also suspects that the
false killer whales might be moving farther offshore, where they could
get hooked when trying to eat the tuna caught by the longline fishery.

So the question is: should the National Marine Fisheries Service come up
with even more regulations for the longline fishery in case more false
killer whales move offshore looking for tuna.

Bill Robinson with the Fisheries Service isn’t so sure that they
actually go that far offshore.

“That’s speculation, and it may or may not be true. What we
don’t really know is what the range of each population is.”

So, really, at this point, it’s anyone’s guess why the false killer whale numbers are declining.

The biologist, Robin Baird, is concerned that nothing’s being done.

“Unless something is done to change the factors that are
influencing the population, it probably will continue to decline.”

The environmental group Earthjustice and a coalition of
conservation groups have sued the National Marine Fisheries Service over
failing to develop a plan to protect the false killer whales.

The agency has not responded officially to the lawsuit yet. But Bill
Robinson says an action plan is in the works.

“Hopefully by the fall, we’ll be able to not only appoint the
team, but have the team begin work on a take recovery plan that will
make recommendations to the agency to reduce the incidental take of
false killer whales in the fishery.”

Such a plan might end up costing the commercial fishers money. But
Jim Cook says he’s willing to pay. That’s because false killer whales
pick fish off his lines. They eat the caught tuna before the fishers
can haul them in. That can mean a lot of lost income.

“We would very much welcome any methodology almost
irrespective of cost because we’re suffering quite a bit economically as
it is.”

But the National Marine Fisheries Service first has to find that
methodology.

For The Environment Report, I’m Ari Daniel Shapiro.

Related Links