Tag: drinking water

Governor Calls for Uniform Water Standards

Some Great Lakes governors have agreed they should adopt a consistent set of rules for determining whether their water is clean and safe. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:

Transcript

Some Great Lakes governors have agreed they should adopt a consistent
set of rules for determining whether their water is clean and safe. We
have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:


Seven years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency called on
Great Lakes states to develop uniform standards for monitoring water
quality. Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm says it’s time to end the
patchwork of water protection policies among the states that surround
the lakes.


“Every state has different standards with respect to the water quality.
For example, there may be eight different advisories in respect to fish
consumption in all of the different eight states.”


Granholm is asking the Great Lakes governors and the EPA to form a task
force to create a set of uniform standards. She says that would make it
easier for Great Lakes states to stand together to protect the
resource. And, she says, people would be assured their water is safe
for drinking, swimming and fishing, regardless of which state they are
in.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Rick Pluta.

Related Links

Interview: Carl Pope Criticizes Bush Administration

  • Carl Pope is the Executive Director of the Sierra Club. (Photo courtesy of the Sierra Club)

As the political campaigns get into full swing this presidential election year, the environmental record of George W. Bush is being scrutinized. The big environmental groups are very critical of the Bush administration. In the first of two interviews about the Bush White House approach to environmental protection, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham talks with the Executive Director of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope. Pope and the Sierra Club are critical of the Bush administration’s record on environmental protection:

Transcript

As the political campaigns get into full swing this presidential election year, the
environmental record of George W. Bush is being scrutinized. The big environmental
groups are very critical of the Bush administration. In the first of two interviews about
the Bush White House approach to environmental protection, the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham talks with the Executive Director of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope.
Pope and the Sierra Club are critical of the Bush administration’s record on environmental
protection:


POPE: “The biggest environmental problem this country faces right now is the policies of this
administration. It’s kind of stunning too, when you add it all up, just how much damage they
have quietly managed to set in motion in only three years.”


LG: “Now, we’ve listened to folks in the Bush administration who indicate that what they’re
really doing is bringing some balance to dealing with the economic issues the nation faces and
how it relates to the environmental issues that we face.”


POPE: “Well, let’s look at three trends. In 1980, when Ronald Reagan was President, we began
cleaning up toxic wastes dumps in this country with the Superfund. In 2003, for the first time
because the Bush administration both allowed the Superfund to run out of money and allowed
companies to start dumping new kinds of toxins on the landscape, the American landscape
became more polluted. We started going backwards after 20 years of progress.


1972, under Richard Nixon, another Republican, we made a national commitment under the
Clean Water Act to clean up our rivers and lakes. In 2003, because the Bush administration cut
funding for clean water clean-up and because they exempted large factory feedlots from clean
water regulation, EPA had to report for the first time in 30 years America’s waterways had gotten
dirtier.


And finally, in 1902, Theodore Roosevelt, a third Republican, created Grand Canyon National
Monument. And every president since Theodore Roosevelt left us with more of the American
landscape protected than he found it. And in only three years uniquely, singularly and in the
violation of the entire trend of the entire 20th century, this President Bush has stripped
environmental protection from 235 million acres. It’s an area as big as Texas and Oklahoma that
is now open to development which was protected when George Bush became President. I don’t
think that’s balance.”


LG: “I assume that you’re not all that chummy with everyone in the White House these days….


POPE: “That’s a safe assumption.”


LG: …but I’m trying to get an insight into what you think the thinking might be behind some of
the decisions that the Bush administration makes.”


POPE: “Well, in 1970 we made a national compact in this country. It was a national
environmental compact which was: we were environmental optimists and we believed that as a
nation that we could clean up every waterway, we could modernize every power plant and we
could remedy every toxic waste dump. We said as a nation ‘You know, everybody in this country
is going to have water that’s safe to drink. Everybody is going to live in a community where the
air doesn’t give their kids asthma. And we’re going to take time to do it. The federal government
is going to help everybody. And we’re all going to do it as a community.’ I think the fundamental
problem with that compact from the point of view of this administration is the ‘everyone’ part of
it. They really don’t believe that the community should do very much. They believe individuals
should take care of themselves. If you want to have safe drinking water, get yourself your own
supply; buy bottled water. If you want to breathe clean air, move somewhere where the air is
cleaner. They really don’t believe in the idea that every American ought to enjoy certain basic
environmental amenities simply as a consequence of being an American.


And, I think what motivates them is their concern that if it’s the federal government that
is cleaning up our toxic waste sites, then people will have faith in the federal government. And
they don’t have faith in the federal government. In fact, one of their chief advisors says he wants
to shrink the federal government down to a size where he can drown it in a bathtub. And I think
it’s the fact that the environmental compact in this country was based on the idea of an
environmental safety net for everyone that they find antithetical to their view that we all ought to
be tough, we all ought to be competitive, we all ought to be self-reliant and on our own. And
they don’t like the fact that the environmental compact says wait a minute, we’re all in this
together and we’re going to solve it together.”


HOST TAG: Carl Pope is the Executive Director of the Sierra Club.

Related Links

Utilities Obstructed in Long-Term Planning Efforts

Municipal water and sewer plants are gathering better data on how their systems are used, for better planning. But a government report finds that short-sighted local governments sometimes end up derailing the utilities’ long-term plans. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Municipal water and sewer plants are gathering better data on how their systems are used for
better planning, but a government report finds that short-sighted local governments sometimes
end up derailing the utilities’ long-term plans. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham reports:


A lot of federal money is used to build local drinking water and wastewater facilities. So, the
Congress asked its investigative arm, the General Accounting Office, to see if the money is used
wisely. The GAO found that many municipal utilities are using comprehensive asset
management for planning purposes. That’s closely looking how systems are used, where the
demand is growing, and how best to plan for future growth.


But the utilities are running into some problems. Collecting and managing all of that data is a bit
overwhelming. The GAO recommends the Environmental Protection Agency help municipalities
share data on an EPA website so that every utility is not gathering the same kind of information
over and over.


There’s still one more problem. Even with better information, the GAO found… often the local
politicians who oversee the utilities have short-term goals that hamper long-term planning by the
utilities.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Study: Mtbe Alternatives Pose Similar Threat

The Clean Air Act says gasoline must contain additives to help it burn more cleanly. But the common additive MTBE is a proven environmental threat. And a new study says the alternatives could be just as dangerous. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Corbin Sullivan reports:

Transcript

The Clean Air Act says gasoline must contain additives to help it burn more cleanly. But the
common additive MTBE is a proven environmental threat. And a new study says the alternatives
could be just as dangerous. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Corbin Sullivan reports:


Underground storage tanks at gas stations can leak. Fuel
additives like MTBE leak faster than the gas and can
cause groundwater pollution.


For that reason, seventeen states, including New York,
Michigan and Illinois have restricted or will restrict the use
of MTBE in gasoline.


That means other fuel additives intended to reduce air
pollution will have to be used instead.


Mel Suffet co-authored a new study published in the
journal Environmental Science and Technology.


He says some of the alternatives to MTBE can cause the
same problems.


They can be toxic and can make groundwater
undrinkable. Suffet says to solve the problem, leaks need
to be prevented.


“The first thing you have to do is develop a design of
underground fuel storage tanks to emphasize containment
leak detection and repair.”


Suffet says even modern tanks are prone to leaks. So he
says designers need to go back to the drawing board to
create a leak free tank.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Corbin
Sullivan.

Related Links

Report: Aging Sewer Systems Plague Ontario

A new report finds outdated sewage systems are polluting waters throughout Ontario. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:

Transcript

A new report finds outdated sewage systems are polluting waters throughout Ontario. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:


The report says aging treatment plants are dumping improperly treated sewage into Ontario
waterways, especially when rain or snow overload the system.


It’s a problem that’s found all over North America.


The latest report comes from the Ontario Environmental Commissioner. It says 38 percent of the
province’s sewage is released into Lake Ontario. Commissioner Gord Miller says that waste
threatens the ecosystem.


“You can actually get the risk of fish kills, of fish avoidance, loss of fish habitat, and then you can
get discharges of actual toxic materials, like ammonia.”


Miller says the sewage is not threatening people’s drinking water. But it’s harming fish and
wildlife, and leading to the closure of beaches.


He wants to see Ontario study and address the problem.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I”m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

States to Have More Control Over Goose Populations?

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to give the states more power in reducing the resident Canada geese population. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly has more:

Transcript

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to give the states more power in reducing the resident
Canada geese population. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly has more:


An estimated 3.2 million Canada geese have made permanent homes on lawns, farms, and airport
runways across the U.S.


Officials say the birds collide with aircraft, damage crops and pollute water supplies.


States traditionally needed a permit to get rid of geese.


But Ron Kokel, a biologist with U.S. Fish and Wildlife, says the new proposal would allow
communities to have more say in how the bird population is managed.


“It puts the decision on exactly what management technique the state or local authorities want to
use; it puts that decision more on the local level.”


The public has until October 20th to comment to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the
proposal.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

Woman Fights Uphill Battle Against Water Diversion

  • Upstream on the Glen Tay River in the Fall of 1999. Residents fought against a Swiss company (OMYA) who wanted to draw water from the river to make slurry for products like toothpaste and paper. (Photo courtesy of Carol Dillon)

In many communities, there are increasing demands for the limited supply of water. But people often feel there’s little they can do to protect that water from outside interests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports on one woman who fought to stop millions of gallons of water from being drained from her local river:

Transcript

In many communities, there are increasing demands for the limited
supply of water. But people often feel there’s little they can do to protect that
water from outside interests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports on one
woman who fought to stop millions of gallons of water from being
drained from her local river:


(sound of crunching leaves)


It’s been a wet spring. But the leaves along the shore of the Tay River in Perth, Ontario
crunch beneath your feet.


Carol Dillon walks a path that was once submerged in water. She stops at a maple tree, and
points to a ring of greenish bark around its trunk.


“This is where the water comes to normally in the spring…
This was sort of the natural shore line, but the water has not
been this high, this would be the fourth year now.”


(sound of wind, crunching of leaves)


Carol Dillon and her husband, Mel, bought this piece of land in
1999. They came here to retire. Then, in the fall of that year, the Tay River dried up.


Four months later, they were shocked when a manufacturer applied
to take 1.2 million gallons of water out of the river every day.


“We simply looked out the window at this very dry river and
said, well how are they going to do that?”


Dillon soon found out they weren’t the only people asking that
question. Six thousand residents depend on the river for drinking water.
Another six thousand draw from wells in the river’s watershed. People worried there wouldn’t be
enough clean water during the dry season. And that wildlife would suffer.


(sound of truck)


An 18-wheeler pulls out of the OMYA plant in Perth, carrying a
load of calcium carbonate sludge. The Swiss company needs water to make the sludge, which
goes into products like paper and toothpaste.


They already draw about 400 thousand gallons out of the area’s
groundwater each day. But OMYA wanted to triple its water consumption so it could step
up production, with a promise of new jobs.


The public had 15 days to comment on the company’s plan.


As a consultant with the federal government, Dillon knew a bit
about bureaucracy. So she started helping out neighbors, who weren’t sure what they
could do.


“At one of the public meetings, a farmer stood up and said,
‘I’ve been a farmer on the Tay River for 40 years, but I don’t know
what to write in a letter to the minister.’ He said, ‘well, we have
to be careful with the water.’ And I said, ‘that’s your letter.'”


Dillon says she wanted to convince people that their voices do
matter. So she dropped off envelopes for them, faxed their letters, and
answered lots of questions. Before she knew it, she had kick-started a grassroots
movement.


“I was not a tree hugger in my life and I never was a
political person, either, but always believed in responsibility…
This is a democracy and when people have an opinion on something,
your government should hear it.”


People were inspired by Dillon. Jackie Seaton is one of the many who got involved.


“She simply spoke to the issue of water. If you’ve ever read
any of her memos or heard her speak at a council meeting, I mean
everybody can understand what’s she saying because it’s in the
plainest and simplest terms. And I must say that was very, very impressive.”


Typically, the ministry of environment receives fewer than 10
letters. But 283 townspeople wrote in to oppose the water taking.


Despite that, the ministry granted OMYA its permit.


The residents could appeal the decision to a quasi-judicial panel. But without money or a lawyer,
they decided it would be impossible.


Dillon, however, disagreed. She forged ahead on her own, and won the right to a hearing. She
relied on scientists who had retired in the community to help her prepare. It would be her word
against lawyers representing the company and the government.


(ambient sound)


Dillon pulls a thick plastic binder off a bookshelf that’s packed
with evidence used in the hearing.


She insists she wasn’t against the water taking per se. She just wanted the government to make a
decision based on good science. The company was granted the initial permit based in part on 75-
year-old data. Dillon argued more research needed to be done.


Over the past eight years, 46 community groups have challenged
decisions by the Ministry of the Environment.


No one had ever won – until now.


The panel granted the company just one third of the amount of
water it requested, with a potential for more in the future. And it directed the province to conduct
more research on the river.


“First, we were…it was unbelievable and then we were
ecstatic that it was all worth it.”


But the citizens’ celebrations were short-lived.


In April of this year, Ontario’s environment minister, Chris
Stockwell, reversed the tribunal decision and reinstated the full
permit. He cited new information that predicted the river would drop only
a few inches when the water was removed. The minister won’t comment on the outcome, other
than to say he stands by his decision.


But OMYA’s plant administrator, Larry Sparks, says the decision
was based on science. And while he recognizes that citizens have a right to question the
government, he says it shouldn’t come at the expense of business.


“And it’s very difficult to make
business decisions when you apply for a permit and have to wait three
years for approval and conclusion of the process. Our concern was not with the people, but rather
with the fact that the process was allowed to go on for three years.”


For Carol Dillon, the minister’s decision was a disappointing end to a
long struggle.


“You can have this two and a half year-long process and the
minister can just overturn it, politically, then what’s the point
of it all? So I’m back to where I started.”


(sounds by the river)


But Dillon hasn’t given up. Now she’s lobbying Ontario to adopt new standards for water use.
She doesn’t care if she has to write letters, battle lawyers or
lobby politicians – she just wants her community, and everyone in
Ontario, to have a say in the future of their water.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Low Sperm Counts Linked to Pesticides?

A study last year found that men living in rural areas have lower sperm counts than their urban counterparts. Now, researchers say they’ve found a possible reason for the difference. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris Lehman has more:

Transcript

A study last year found that men living in rural areas have lower
sperm counts than their urban counterparts. Now, researchers say
they’ve
found a possible reason for the difference. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chris Lehman reports.

Researchers compared urine samples of men with high and low sperm
counts.
They found that men with low sperm counts were far more likely to have
high
levels of three common pesticides in their urine. Many farmers use the
pesticides to kill weeds and insects on corn, soybeans, and other crops.


Doctor Shanna Swan is a researcher at the University of Missouri. She
says
the study showed that men from all walks of life in the rural areas are
affected, not just those who work directly with the chemicals…


“This is not a study of farmers, it’s not a study of men who work in
industry producing these chemicals. This is the general population.”


Swan says it’s unclear how the pesticides reach the men. She says it’s
likely that men are ingesting the chemicals through their drinking
water.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chris Lehman.

New Herbicide Raises Safety Questions

Corn growers in Michigan and Minnesota are waiting to find out whether they can use a new herbicide this spring. “Balance Pro” is used in 17 states, including several in the Great Lakes region (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio). But it’s not used in Minnesota, Michigan, or Wisconsin. Critics say Balance Pro gets into rivers and lakes too easily, and it could harm wildlife or even people. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

Corn growers in Michigan and Minnesota are waiting to find out whether they can use a new
herbicide this spring. “Balance Pro” is used in 17 states, including several in the Great Lakes
region (Indiana, Illinois, Ohio). But it’s not used in Minnesota, Michigan, or Wisconsin. Critics say
Balance Pro gets into rivers and lakes too easily, and it could harm wildlife or even people. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:


Four years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave conditional approval for a new
weed-killer called Balance Pro. It’s made by a division of Bayer, the same company that makes
aspirin. But the EPA still had some worries.


EPA researchers thought the ingredients in Balance might accumulate in irrigation water. Some
people say, if it turns up in irrigation water, it could turn up in drinking water.


“Missouri has had drinking water reservoirs contaminated with this, and contaminated within the
first year of its use.”


Jannette Brimmer is with Minnesota Citizens for Environmental Advocacy. She worries that
Balance could turn into another environmental problem like atrazine. Atrazine is a commonly
used herbicide. It shows up in drinking water in many parts of the country, at very low levels.
Some studies show, even at those low levels, it’s causing deformities in the sexual organs of
frogs, which might be responsible for reductions in frog populations. And Brimmer wonders if
it might be affecting people too.


“In other words, small dosages at the wrong time in fetal development, pregnancy, in a kid, can
have significant impacts. So we have an opportunity to do the right thing before it gets into our
water, before it poses a health threat, before it’s a problem.”


The EPA doesn’t do any tests to find out whether herbicides affect the hormones of frogs or
people. The agency did conduct tests on the reproduction rates of aquatic animals, and found no
effects.


But the EPA does have one major concern — the effect Balance might have on other crops.
Officials worry if farmers use water polluted with Balance to irrigate crops like cabbage or
lettuce, the herbicide could hurt crop yields.


Both Michigan and Minnesota are trying to figure out how big a threat that might be. Dan
Stoddard, at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, has been watching the field studies from
other states. He says the results are mixed.


Some of the studies looked at how much Balance got into water supplies. They found lower
concentrations than scientists originally predicted.


But some regions are more vulnerable than others, depending on the type of soil. Dan Stoddard
says areas with coarse or sandy soil, or shallow bedrock, are especially vulnerable.


“What has been considered is some requirements that would restrict use of the product in those
areas. But nonetheless it does have the potential to get into groundwater. What we would
require is additional monitoring to see whether that is in fact happening.”


Stoddard says he’s weighing the risk of polluted water against the benefits Balance might offer.
He’s hearing from companies that have been applying Balance in other states. They say, by
adding the new product to their arsenal, they can cut down on their use of other herbicides.


“If somebody uses the same type of pesticide or herbicide over a few years, weeds can become
resistant and what they wind up having to do is increase the concentration of that product. So
having a new chemistry allows lower application rates of the product.”


Wisconsin recently approved the use of Balance. But the Wisconsin Agriculture Department
there imposed so many restrictions, the company decided not to market it in the state. Bob
Olson is a farmer, active in the Wisconsin Corn Growers Association. He says his state is
putting him at a disadvantage compared to other farmers.


“It’s been registered in 17 other corn states. It’s just not been able to be registered here in
Wisconsin because of what we think are undue concerns. And the fact that we can find it in
increasingly smaller quantities. Simply because you can find something, doesn’t mean that level
is ever going to affect anyone.”


Michigan and Minnesota are planning to decide in time for spring planting whether to let
farmers use Balance in their states.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

New Limit on Pesticide in Drinking Water?

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is reviewing how much of a commonly used pesticide it will allow in drinking water. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is reviewing how much of a commonly used
pesticide it will allow in drinking water. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports:


Atrazine is one of the most commonly used pesticides in the nation. It’s found in trace
amounts in water, just about everywhere. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
has measured Atrazine levels in rainfall that exceeded the current drinking water standards. A
recent study indicated that Atrazine was causing male frogs to develop female characteristics at
even lower levels than the drinking water standard allows. Now the Environmental Protection
Agency is doing its own review of Atrazine’s environmental impacts. Dave Deegan is with the
EPA. He says that review has to be completed before the agency can determine whether drinking
water standards should change.


“At this point, really, it’s too early to know what direction that would take or how long that would
take or what the outcome would be.”


It will be late this year before the EPA Office of Water begins to study whether it should loosen,
further restrict, or leave the drinking water standards for Atrazine where they are.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.