Tag: paper

Green Conscience vs. Green Consumerism

  • This first report in the "Your Choice; Your Planet" series looks at the difficulties of being a "green" consumer.

Most of us are conflicted when it comes to the environment. Polls show the majority of us consider ourselves to be environmentally-friendly. But, our day-to-day decisions often don’t measure up to an earth-friendly lifestyle. Part of the reason is that there’s lots of confusion about what’s best for the environment. Another reason is that being earth-friendly is pretty darned inconvenient. In the first report of an ongoing series we’re calling ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham explores the dilemmas we face when we attempt to do right by the environment:

Transcript

Most of us are conflicted when it comes to the environment. Polls show the majority of
us consider ourselves to be environmentally friendly. But, our day-to-day decisions often
don’t measure up to an earth-friendly lifestyle. Part of the reason is that there’s lots of
confusion about what’s best for the environment… Another reason is that being earth-friendly is pretty darned inconvenient. In the first report of an ongoing series we’re
calling ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
explores the dilemmas we face when we attempt to do right by the environment:


It’s tough, trying to be green, or earth-friendly or whatever you want to call it. I mean…
most of us aren’t interested in always trying to find the eco-friendly clothes or trying to
figure out the differences between the “all natural” and the “100-percent real” juice. And
then there’s stuff. There’s all kinds of stuff we need… alright… maybe we don’t NEED
it… but – hey – everybody else has one. Why shouldn’t ?


There’s a gap between being a flower-sniffing, hemp-wearing, tree hugger… and a
regular person trying to be a bit more environmentally friendly. The Executive Director
of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope, says if you’re struggling with that gap… you’re not
alone…


“We haven’t solved the problem of linking up our values and our consumption. Most of
us consume out of habit and convenience. We don’t consume out of our deepest values.”


So… we BELIEVE that we ought to save the earth for future generations. And most of
us have a few habits that make us feel a little better about ourselves. Maybe we bring a
coffee mug to work instead of using Styrofoam cups. Or we might take the bus or the
commuter train once in a while, you know, to save the earth from our bit of car exhaust.


But the real challenge comes when we start buying stuff. You know… like groceries,
and cars, and appliances. Stuff. Joel Makower is the founder of GreenBiz-dot-com. It’s
website that bills itself as a “The Resource Center on Business, the Environment and the
Bottom Line.” He says the big impact on the environment takes place in how we spend
our money…


“I think consumers know intuitively that every time they open their wallet they cast a
vote for or against the environment. But, doing that’s a very complicated matter.”


(grocery store sound up)


It’s complicated because even if you walk into a store determined to buy only the
products that are the most environmentally friendly… you’re bombarded with conflicting
claims. Say you’re looking for trash bags. Are the bags claiming to be made of 80-
percent recycled plastic any better than the ones over here called ‘enviro-bags?’ I don’t
know. And that’s the problem. Most of the time we really don’t know which products
are the safest for the environment. And don’t even get me started on the whole paper or
plastic grocery bag question.


Joel Makower says we care, but we’re confused.


“There’s a huge gap between green concern and green consumerism. And that’s
everybody’s fault.”


Makower says companies don’t know how to market their products’ environmental
attributes and when they do try, he says, they often do it poorly or misleadingly. And
we’re afraid to try new things… not knowing if we’re being suckered into a poorly
performing product that SAYS it’s more environmentally friendly.


So, often, rather than deal with all that confusion… or instead of spending hours and
hours researching everything we buy…. we figure… “Well, it can’t be that bad; can it?”


Charles Ballard is an economist at Michigan State University. He says, really, there’s
only so much you can ask of us…


“Keep in mind that people can’t be expected to become saints just because they’re
interested in the environment.”


He says most of us see being environmentally friendly something like extra credit… or
something we do when we’re better off financially… kind of like a luxury item that we
can feel good about. Ballard says most of the time we’re more distracted by the glitz and
glamour we see on TV or read about in magazines and want just a little bit of that good
life for ourselves…


“What we have is a situation where immediate gratification, where grabbing for all the
gusto you can right now is the thing that’s driving our decisions.”


And when you’re going for the gusto… you tend to forget about the environmental cost
of your lifestyle. We buy the wrong things… and we buy too many things. We just plain
consume too much. But, then… sometimes our conscience starts eating at us… and
before you know it, we’re being a little more careful about recycling at work… or some
other little contribution to the earth’s well being.


The Sierra Club’s Carl Pope says environmentalists… or those of us who like to think of
ourselves that way… keep trying to do better…


“The American people’s values and ideals are ahead of their own habits. That’s actually
why we have religions, is because people want to be better than they are. And one of the
reasons we have an environmental movement, I think, is because Americans want to be
better than we are.”


And so… we sin in all of our consumption… and then make restitution by trying to be
better, more earth-friendly consumers. The problem is… as one writer put it… you can’t
really buy your way out of consumption. When you get right down to it…. you really
just have to buy less. That’s a tough one.


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

Related Links

Groups Call for Moratorium on Gm Trees

Some environmentalists are calling for a moratorium on growing genetically altered trees in orchards and forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Some environmentalists are calling for a moratorium on growing genetically altered trees in
orchards and forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


Genetically modified crops have been in the fields for a number of years. Now, genetically
altered trees are being introduced. Fruit trees with genes spliced in to protect them from pests or
disease are becoming more common. And some forest trees are being genetically altered to make
them easier to process for paper.


Jim Diamond is with the Sierra Club. He says if these genetic traits are transferred into the wild,
it could mean biological contamination…


“When you put corporate-patented hacked genetic code out into the out-of-doors where it can
travel around, that genetic code can get into other related species and the way in which they can
interact and change nature is not understood at all.”


Orchards and paper companies say use of the genetically modified trees is safe. In some cases,
genetically modified trees have prevented the loss of entire fruit industries… and might be used
to restore some valuable trees back to the forests.


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

Related Links

Forests for Lumber or Wildlife?

  • Loggers and environmentalists fight continually over the use of national forests. Managers at many national forests around the country are developing new long-range plans. (Photo by Stephanie Hemphill)

Loggers and environmentalists are in a continual fight over the use of national forests. One of their battlegrounds is the long-range planning process. Every ten to fifteen years, the U.S. Forest Service designs a new plan for each national forest. Right now, several forests in the Northwoods are getting new plans. The Forest Service says it’s paying more attention to biodiversity, and wants to encourage more old growth forests. Critics on the environmental side say the new plans are just business as usual. Loggers say they still can’t cut enough trees. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

Loggers and environmentalists are in a continual fight over the use of
national forests. One of their battlegrounds is the long-range
planning process. Every ten to fifteen years, the U.S. Forest Service
designs a new plan for each national forest. Right now, several
forests in the Northwoods are getting new plans. The Forest Service
says it’s paying more attention to biodiversity, and wants to encourage
more old growth forests. Critics on the environmental side say the
new plans are just business as usual. Loggers say they still
can’t cut enough trees. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie
Hemphill reports:


(sound of car door closing, footsteps in woods)


Jerry Birchem is a logger. He’s visiting one of his harvest sites on
land owned by St. Louis County, in northeastern Minnesota. The highest
quality wood will be turned into wooden dowels… other logs will go to a
lumber mill… the poorest quality will be turned into paper.


Birchem tries to get the highest possible value from each tree. He says in the last ten
years, the price of trees has tripled.


“We have to pay more for timber and the mills want to pay less, and we’re caught in the
middle of trying to survive in this business climate.”


Birchem likes buying timber from the county, like at this logging site. He hardly ever
cuts trees from the national forest anymore. He’d like to, but the Forest Service doesn’t
make much of its land available for logging. The agency says it doesn’t have enough staff
to do the environmental studies required before trees can be cut on federal land.


Jerry Birchem says loggers need the Forest Service to change that.


“You know there needs to be processes set in place so you know, it doesn’t take
so long to set up these timber sales. I mean, they’ve got to go through so
many analyses and so many appeals processes.”


Birchem says it should be harder for environmental groups to get in the way of timber
sales. But not everybody agrees with Birchem.


Clyde Hanson lives in Grand Marais, on the edge of Lake Superior. He’s an active
member of the Sierra Club.


He says it’s true loggers are taking less timber off federal lands in recent
years. But he says the Forest Service still isn’t protecting the truly special
places that deserve to be saved.


He says a place like Hog Creek should be designated a wilderness area, where no trees
can be cut.


(sound of creek, birds)


“Very unique mixture, we must be right at the transition between two types of forest.”


Red pine thrive here, along with jackpine and tamarack. It’s rough and swampy country,
far from roads. So far, loggers have left these trees alone.


But with the value of trees skyrocketing, Hanson says the place will be logged eventually.


Forest Service planners made note of the fact that the Hog Creek area is relatively
untouched by humans. They could have protected it, but they decided not to.


“And we think that’s a mistake, because this is our last chance to protect wilderness and
provide more wilderness for future generations. If we don’t do it now, eventually there’ll
be enough roads or enough logging going on in these places that by the next forest plan
it’ll be too late.”


But the Forest Service says it is moving to create more diversity in the
woods. It wants a forest more like what nature would produce if left
to her own devices.


The agency says it will reduce the amount of aspen in the forest. Aspen has been
encouraged, because it grows fast. When it’s cut, it grows back quickly, so loggers and
paper companies can make more money.


The trouble is, an aspen forest only offers habitat for some kinds of animals,
such as deer and grouse. Other animals, especially songbirds, need older trees to
live in.


So the Forest Service wants to create more variety in the woods, with more old trees than
there are now. But how to get the forest from here to there, is the problem.
Duane Lula is one of the Forest Service planners. He says fires and windstorms are nature’s way of producing
diverse forests. They sweep the woods periodically, killing big stands of older trees, and
preparing the soil for pines and other conifers. Jackpines, for instance, used to be more
common in the northwoods. Lula says the only practical way for man to mimic nature is
by cutting trees down.


“We can’t have those fires anymore just because people live here, there are private
homes here. There’s no way that we could replicate those fires. Timber management is one way of regenerating those jackpine stands in
lieu of having major fires.”


But Lula says the main purpose of timber cutting in the new plan is to move the forest
toward the diversity the agency wants, not to produce wood. And he says that shows the
Forest Service is looking at the woods in a new way.


“The previous plan tended to be very focused on how many acres you were going to
clearcut, how much timber you were going to produce, how much wildlife habitat you
were going to produce, and this one is trying to say, if we have this kind of desired
condition on the ground that we’re shooting for, then these other things will come from
that.”


As it does in the planning process in other national forests around the Great Lakes, the
Forest Service will adjust the plan after hearing from the public. Loggers,
environmentalists, and everyone else will have a chance to have their say. A final version
will be submitted to the Regional Forester in Milwaukee early next year. It could then
face a challenge in court.


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

Related Links

Converting Garbage Into Ethanol

A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. You might have heard of plants that burn garbage to create energy. But this plant is different. This plant would convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. You might have
heard of plants that burn garbage to create energy. But this plant is different. This plant
would convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie
Grant reports:


The walls of Genahol, Inc., are covered with pictures of Donald Bogner’s wife and
children. Bogner is a ruddy-looking man with a friendly attitude. He’s the kind of guy
who likes to get things done. He started Genahol seven years ago, with the idea that he
could turn paper, leaves, and grass clippings into fuel.


“The green waste is such a problem, because, what do you do with it? Well, you chop it
up, you mix manure with it, you package it, and sooner or later you finally say, hey, I
can’t sell this stuff.”


Bogner says Genahol can make fuel out nearly any plant material. A lot of green waste
winds up in landfills. But Bogner patented a new kind of process. It converts green and
paper waste to sugar, distills the sugar into alcohol and transforms the alcohol into
ethanol. Until now, ethanol has usually been made from corn or other grains. Bogner
says they’ve been surprised by how many products they can re-use to make ethanol.
Anything from stale beer, to old perfume, or factory-rejected candy…


“You just can’t imagine the volume when you start talking about Christmas candy canes.
And a bad batch of candy canes may be three million candy canes that a producer has to
destroy because they came out wrong in a batch or whatever. So, you know, three
million candy canes (laughs).”


If a Genahol facility is built, Bogner says it could convert anywhere from one hundred to
one-thousand tons of waste per day and make up to three million gallons of ethanol a
year. As long as the selling price of ethanol remains over a dollar a gallon, Bogner says
Genahol can make money. But he needs a deal. He needs a city that’s willing to let him
sort through the trash. It should be an easy sell, he says, because cities could save landfill
space and get a cut of the profits from ethanol sales.


“The hardest sell right now is that we cannot right now take them to a facility and show
them ethanol coming out of a spigot.”


And that’s the problem not only with Genahol, but with other companies that want to
convert waste to ethanol. Their ideas are theoretical. But Bogner says things are about to
change for Genahol. He’s negotiating a contract with the Solid Waste Authority of
Central Ohio, known as SWACO. It is in charge of trash in Columbus and owns one of
the largest public landfills in the country. Executive Director Mike Long is interested in
Bogner’s ideas.


“We are always looking for new methods, cost effective methods to reduce, reuse and
recycle the waste stream to reduce reliance on landfills. That is our primary purpose at
SWACO, to reduce reliance on landfills.”


SWACO already diverts yard wastes and paper from the trash stream, but there hasn’t
been much of a market for those products. That’s why Long says contracting with
Genahol makes sense.


“It’s being approached on, I think, a very conservative point of view, small scale pilot
project. Trying to minimize the risk to SWACO and the public from a financial point of
view.”


It might be a bit of a risk. SWACO and other trash managers got burned in the mid-
1990s by waste-to-energy facilities. Some plants were forced to close because they
emitted too much pollution. Genahol’s Don Bogner says the only emissions from his
plant will be carbon dioxide, which he plans to capture and sell for industrial use.
Bogner and SWACO are negotiating one of the first deals in the nation for a trash-to-
ethanol plant. Many entrepreneurs trying to sell similar ideas are having a tough time
making a deal. Monte Shaw, an ethanol industry spokesperson, says these companies
should hang on a little longer.


“It’s always harder to be first. It’s always harder to convince investors, and banks, and
government agencies, that this is going to work. ”


The government is considering tax breaks and financial assistance to encourage new
ethanol plants. One reason the government is interested is to cut dependence on foreign
oil. Another reason, is ethanol is a good replacement for MTBE in gasoline. MTBE has
been used to reduce ozone pollution, but the chemical has contaminated water supplies
and the government wants to phase it out. Don Bogner expects the move from MTBE to
increase demand for ethanol. He’s wondering if that means Genahol will be able to turn a
profit.


“That’s what my wife asks me, are we going to make money this year?”


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Grant in Kent.

CONVERTING GARBAGE INTO ETHANOL (Short Version)

A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. This could be one of the first plants in the nation to convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

A company in the Great Lakes region wants to convert trash into fuel. This could be one
of the first plants in the nation to convert organic trash into ethanol. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Julie Grant reports:


The president of Genahol, Inc., says his facilities can make fuel out of nearly any plant
material. A lot of paper, leaves, and grass clippings wind up in landfills. But Donald
Bogner patented a new kind of process. It converts green waste to sugar, distills the
sugar into alcohol and transforms the alcohol into ethanol. Ethanol is usually made from
corn or other grains. Bogner says Genahol reuses other people’s trash.


“Genahol actually receives payment for its materials. Rather than going out and having
to pay a dollar fifty to two fifty a bushel for corn or something, we actually get paid on a
tonnage basis. So it can be very, very profitable.”


No Genahol facility has yet been built. Bogner and the Solid Waste Authority of Central
Ohio are negotiating one of the first deals in the nation for a trash-to-ethanol plant.


For
the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Julie Grant in Kent.

Fox River a Superfund Site?

Environmentalists are pushing the Environmental Protection Agency todeclare the Fox River in Wisconsin a Superfund site. The Great LakesRadio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Commentary – Recycling at Risk

In recent months, the country’s solid waste companies have been engaged in what amounts to a battle of the giants. As corporations like USA Waste and Waste Management merge and gain power, small, independent waste haulers are being swallowed whole. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Gayle Miller believes the frenzy in the solid waste industry spells bad news for recycling:

Commentary – Cutting Paper Waste

Remember the paperless society? As we all know, it never really happened. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Bob Lilienfeld knows why, and has some suggestions on ways to cut back on the ever-increasing avalanche of paper used and thrown away: