The Postal Service is getting no stimulus money for making its federal buildings more energy efficient. It’s all going to be done with the revenue it makes when you buy a postage stamp. (Photo courtesy of the US Postal Service)
The US Postal Service is the first
government agency to report how much
of the greenhouse gases it emits.
Five-point-three metric tons a year.
Lester Graham reports on how it plans
to reduce its emissions:
Transcript
The US Postal Service is the first
government agency to report how much
of the greenhouse gases it emits.
Five-point-three metric tons a year.
Lester Graham reports on how it plans
to reduce its emissions:
The post office goal is to reduce emissions 20% by the year 2020.
Sam Pulcrano is the Vice President of Sustainability at the Postal Service. He says, over the next six years, they’ll cut fuel consumption by 20% and energy use by 30%. They’re already doing energy audits of the 500 largest postal facilities.
“And where it makes business sense, we’re replacing things like roofs, the HVAC systems, replacing windows with more energy efficient windows and lighting with high-efficiency lighting.”
Graham: “There’s been some consideration of eliminating Saturday delivery. Is that figured into your calculations on reducing greenhouse gases?”
“It will if and when Congress gives us the ability to do so.”
The Postal Service is getting no stimulus money for making its federal buildings more energy efficient. It’s all going to be done with the revenue it makes when you buy a postage stamp.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years - just by building housing closer together. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Transcript
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Most Americans live in or near big cities – but those in the suburbs have to drive a lot.
The National Research Council completed a study for Congress. It finds that building housing closer together near urban centers could reduce the amount people drive. That would save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Marlon Boarnet is a professor at the University of California, Irvine. He was on the study committee.
“The best evidence out there leads us to believe that people who live in more dense development do in fact drive less. And we feel that the evidence can conclude that that’s a causal relationship.”
Even if single-family homes were built closer together, it would mean less greenhouse gases.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years – just by building housing closer together.
42% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the US are related to everything that goes into creating the food and products we use, and then throw away. (Photo courtesy of the National Cancer Institute)
More than 100 world leaders are
in New York today talking about
climate change at The United Nations.
A new report from the U-S Environmental
Protection agency says a big chunk of
greenhouse gas emissions can be pinned
on how we use land and resources.
Tamara Keith has more:
Transcript
More than 100 world leaders are
in New York today talking about
climate change at The United Nations.
A new report from the U-S Environmental
Protection agency says a big chunk of
greenhouse gas emissions can be pinned
on how we use land and resources.
Tamara Keith has more:
Some EPA scientists say greenhouse gas emissions are not just about tailpipes and smokestacks. They say you have to look at the big picture.
42% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the US are related to everything that goes into creating the food and products we use, and then throw away. So, they say more reduce, reuse and recycle. And, a lot of emissions are caused by urban sprawl. We have to drive everywhere.
Brigit Lowery is with the EPA. She says there are ways to reduce those emissions too.
“Encouraging compact development, such as promoting smart growth. But also reducing development pressures on green space, such as redeveloping formerly contaminated properties.”
Lowery said she knew going into it that land use and resource management contributed to climate change. But she was surprised by how much.
This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Graph courtesy of NASA and NOAA)
The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:
The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the EPA to decide whether greenhouse gases are pollutants. The EPA is making the case that they are.
But setting rules to reduce those emissions is problematic.
The Clean Air Act says it you emit 250-tons a year of a pollutant, you need a pollution permit. 250-tons of CO2 a year is not a lot.
Jeff Holmstead worked in the EPA on air pollution issues during the last Bush Administration. Now, he’s a lawyer with the Washington DC firm Bracewell and Giuliani.
“You know, 250-tons of CO2 according to EPA would include most schools, most apartment buildings, any kind of commercial building. It just isn’t possible to develop permits for all of these sources.”
So the EPA plans to raise the amount to 25,000-tons. But, that’s not what the Clean Air Act says.
That’s one reason why the Obama Administration prefers a climate change law passed by Congress.
Before paying big bucks for a geothermal heat pump, try a little insulation first. (Photo by Jennifer Dickert)
Architecture firms, engineering firms and other energy
auditors are getting a lot more business these days.
Lester Graham reports… it’s part of a plan to save
energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions:
Transcript
Architecture firms, engineering firms and other energy auditors are getting a lot more business these days. Lester Graham reports… it’s part of a plan to save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.
One of the goals of all that federal stimulus money is to make a lot of buildings more energy efficient. First step… get an energy audit. Finding out how much energy a building is wasting has meant a lot of business for people trained to do that kind of work.
Dan Jacobs is with the architecture firm A-THREE-C in Ann Arbor Michigan.
“It’s easily doubled for us in the last year and we’re looking for it to double again as we go into 2010.”
Dan Jacobs says there’s a lot of excitement about renewable energy such as solar panels and rooftop wind turbines … but most buildings waste a lot of energy… so he recommends:
“First thing they want to do is conservation.”
Insulating, replacing windows, and efficient lighting cut energy use. Energy that would still be wasted no matter what fancy renewable energy gadget is put on the rooftop.
The Energy Information Administration projects that in 2009 we'll cut our greenhouse gas emissions by 5%. (Photo courtesy of the US EPA)
The recession doesn’t have a lot of upsides,
but there is an environmental silver lining.
Carbon dioxide emissions are down. But,
as Tamara Keith reports,
greenhouse gas emissions are expected to
rise as the economy improves:
Transcript
The recession doesn’t have a lot of upsides,
but there is an environmental silver lining.
Carbon dioxide emissions are down. But,
as Tamara Keith reports,
greenhouse gas emissions are expected to
rise as the economy improves:
The Energy Information Administration projects that in 2009 we’ll cut our greenhouse gas emissions by 5%. Emissions were down in 2008 too.
Elias Johnson is an energy analyst. He says the economy is expected to pick up next year. That means coal, natural gas and petroleum use will pick up too.
“It’s not all going to happen at one time, so that will be gradual. And then visvis the emissions from that energy consumption will probably increase gradually.”
In 2010, Johnson says emissions are projected to rise 0.7%. Not much, really. And emissions will still be lower than they were when the economy was booming.
“For one thing, the economic activity is not going to be getting back to those levels.”
John Vrieze has a machine called a digester on his dairy farm that's used to turn manure into energy (Photo by Todd Melby)
Big dairy farms produce more than just milk. They also generate manure. Lots and lots
of it. That can be a problem for farmers and the environment. Todd Melby reports on a
technology that reduces manure and generates electricity:
Transcript
Big dairy farms produce more than just milk. They also generate manure. Lots and lots
of it. That can be a problem for farmers and the environment. Todd Melby reports on a
technology that reduces manure and generates electricity:
(sound of suckling cows)
I’m on a dairy farm with John Vrieze and his daughter Brittany.
Oh, and some cows too.
Vrieze is a frugal man. A couple of winters ago, he had a contest with his son to see who
could use the least electricity. Vrieze was willing to go to extreme measures.
His daughter Brittany tells the story this way:
Brittany Vrieze: “He’d shut his fridge off in the winter time. Just use the outdoors for his
fridge. He was definitely trying to keep the kilowatts down.”
Todd Melby: “So what did he do? He just kept his milk in the porch?”
Brittany Vrieze: “Yup.”
Todd Melby: “And kept his frozen stuff outside?”
Brittany Vrieze: “Yup. Yup.”
Today, Vrieze isn’t just trying to save energy. He’s trying to create it.
(sound of cow moos)
From cow dung.
He’s got 1,600 head of cattle at his place here in western Wisconsin. Those cows produce
milk that gets made into cheese. But they also produce about 50,000 gallons of manure
— every day.
Farmers are required to store that manure in a big pool-like structure called a lagoon.
John Vrieze covers his up with a giant tarp.
“It would blow up from the biogas. It would look like a great big balloon or like the
Metrodome, for folks in the Cities. It’s from the nature decomposition of the manure. It
creates biogas. We would have to take that gas out from underneath the cover and flare it
off, which got us to thinking that there has to be a better way to use that energy than just
to flare it off.”
So Vrieze bought a $1 million machine called a digester. And he had help from the
federal government. They paid for a quarter of it. The government is interested in these
things because they can turn manure into energy.
And it turns out — the reason it’s called a digester — is a farm thing.
“A cow has four stomachs. We call the digester really the fifth stomach. All the stuff that
comes out of the back of the cow we then put in that digester.”
So this “fifth stomach” produces energy. However, it’s not ready-to-use energy. To sell it
as natural gas, it has to be about 95% methane. The gas from the digester is only about
60% methane.
(sound of pipeline burn off)
Another option is to convert it to electricity. But in the U.S., electricity is cheap.
Todd Melby: “You tried to sell it to the electric company, but they didn’t want it.”
Brittany Vrieze: “They’re not offering us enough money. So …”
After all this investment by Vrieze and the federal government, some of the gas he
collects is just being burned off into the air.
But maybe not for long.
Vrieze wants to build a greenhouse right on his Wisconsin farm so he can grow
vegetables and herbs in the winter. He says he’ll power it with energy from the digester.
“So, instead of your produce coming from 2,000 miles away – from the central valley of
California – wouldn’t it be neat if it came from 45 miles away?”
Vrieze is planning to use the water from the cow manure for his vegetables and herbs in
his greenhouse. And he’s got a machine similar to ones used at wastewater treatment
plants to clean the manure water.
But even with the digester, there’s still leftover manure he has to deal with. But Vrieze
says the digester makes it more manageable.
(blowing sound)
Some of the dry manure is blown into a pile where it’s gathered up and used as bedding
for the cows. In the summer, it’s also used for another purpose.
“It’s just a clean version of manure. It stinks a little bit. Most of the stink has been taken
out of it. And we mix this with potting soil and it works great for the plants. So …”
That manure/potting soil mix is sold to gardeners in the city. It’s another way for Vrieze
to be frugal and environmental at the same time.
Stonyfield says their new diet has cut cow burps by 12%.
(Photo by Peggy Greb, courtesy of the USDA)
Cows burp methane gas. It’s a potent greenhouse gas. The Environmental Protection Agency says cow burps alone make up 20% of the methane emissions in the US. Rebecca Williams reports some people worry the government might step in:
Transcript
Cows burp methane gas. It’s a potent greenhouse gas. The Environmental Protection Agency says cow burps alone make up 20% of the methane emissions in the US. Rebecca Williams reports some people worry the government might step in:
The farm lobby’s worried Congress will try to regulate gassy cows.
But if you thumb through the giant climate change bill before Congress, you’ll find Section 811. That section says the government can’t regulate cow burps.
In the meantime, some farmers are trying to make their cows less gassy.
The company Stonyfield Farm is getting its dairy farmers to change their cows’ diets.
Nancy Hirschberg is with the company. She says the new diet has cut cow burps by 12%.
“It’s very much like people. When you are feeling good, you’re not having a lot of gas – you’re more efficient, more of your energy is available for living life. The same with the cows, you want as much energy as possible to go into producing milk, not into burps which are in fact, waste.”
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.
University of Florida biologist Ted Schuur does field work in the Alaska tundra every summer (Photo courtesy of Ted Schuur)
To protect the tundra, scientists at Eight Mile Lake put down boardwalks in the places they most frequently walk (Photo by Amy Mayer)
Graduate student Hanna Lee balances on the boardwalk as she moves equipment at the research site (Photo by Amy Mayer)
A report in this week’s journal Nature looks at how thawing ground up North might
impact global warming. Amy Mayer spent some time in Interior Alaska with
scientists at Eight Mile Lake:
Transcript
A report in this week’s journal Nature looks at how thawing ground up North might
impact global warming. Amy Mayer spent some time in Interior Alaska with
scientists at Eight Mile Lake:
Permafrost is ground that’s supposed to be frozen all the time. But for decades it’s been
thawing in places.
When that happens, carbon gets released—potentially contributing to the greenhouse
effect.
Ted Schuur’s a biologist at the University of Florida but he spends his summers doing
experiments near Healy, Alaska.
I tagged along during some field visits.
I met Schuur when we were both living in Fairbanks. He lives far away now, but loves
Alaska. You only work here year after year if you do. Summer field work is brutal – tons
of mosquitoes and you work all the time because the sun doesn’t set.
Pretty soon, we’re there.
“This has to be one of my more photogenic field sites that I ever worked at.”
Tundra surrounds us. We’re just north of the Alaska Range. I can see the snow-capped
peaks. We change into rubber boots, pick up our packs, and, after a few steps, we’re on
the tussocks.
Alaskans often say walking on tussocks is like balancing on basketballs. It’s not easy. If
your feet slip off, they get wet. Schuur’s tall and used to this, so he goes faster than me,
and with less bumbling.
Soon, we’re balancing on lumber instead. Schuur and his group try to protect the areas
where they work with narrow boardwalks.
“When we first came out here, we put these boardwalks that we’re walking on now, big
10 feet pieces of lumber – they’re like 2x6s or 2x8s. But we don’t really want to walk on
the tundra because we come here a lot and you’d end up with a trail in no time and
destroy vegetation.”
Schuur knows trudging across the tundra damages it and he tries to minimize that harm.
But in order to answer his questions about the potential greenhouse effect from thawing
permafrost, he has to dig in.
Schuur saws into the tundra with a bread knife.
“It’s very satisfying. It’s like cutting a big cake – though this is a cake with lots of roots in it.”
He cuts up the plants and packs the roots and the tops into jars.
“We’re going to measure respiration of plants.”
Schuur uses a machine to scrub out the carbon from the air that’s in the jars. The plant
tops and roots will continue to respire carbon dioxide until they die. Later, he’ll use fancy
equipment to “date” the carbon that’s left.
He needs the age of the carbon because when he finds older carbon he knows it’s only
recently escaped the frozen ground. That makes it extra in the system.
At first, Schuur learned, new carbon coincides with more plant growth that uses up the
addition. That means no greenhouse effect.
But, later, the permafrost keeps thawing, more old carbon becomes available, and plant
growth just can’t keep up. That means, carbon dioxide ends up in the atmosphere from
the thawing permafrost – just like it does from burning coal or gasoline.
The thawing may ultimately be a bad thing, but to understand and explain it further,
Schuur wants to document it – or even cause some. Next, he says…
“As strange as it seems, I would love to thaw permafrost on a large scale,
experimentally.”
The dilemma, of course, is that causing a thaw means contributing to – in a small way –
a process that might damage or destroy the ecosystem. But we all emit carbon dioxide,
just by driving.
“Even as I do that and I do an experiment where I melt out a little bit of the permafrost, I
think we’re generating this information that’s helping society answer these huge
questions.”
Schuur says the amount of tundra he’d sacrifice is tiny relative to the whole circumpolar
region, where tons of carbon waits in ground that is frozen now but could eventually
thaw.
The Postal Service is getting no stimulus money for making its federal buildings more energy efficient. It’s all going to be done with the revenue it makes when you buy a postage stamp. (Photo courtesy of the US Postal Service)
