Memos from Bush political appointees are telling government scientists there's no way to make a connection between specific greenhouse gas emissions and endangered wildlife, so don't going looking for one. (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
Wildlife scientists in government
agencies have been ordered not to analyze
whether greenhouse gases affect endangered
animals. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Wildlife scientists in government
agencies have been ordered not to analyze
whether greenhouse gases affect endangered
animals. Lester Graham reports:
Memos from Bush political appointees are telling government scientists there’s no way
to make a connection between specific greenhouse gas emissions and endangered
wildlife, so don’t going looking for one.
In other words, that ice melting in the arctic causing polar bears so much difficulty?
Don’t try to use science to blame coal-burning power plants in the U.S.
Jeff Ruch is with Public Employees for Envrionemental Responsibility. He says this new
rule is the Bush administration’s way of making sure more coal-fired power plants can
be built.
“The Bush administration is doing everything they can to smooth a way to site an
additional 20 plants in the near term from their point of view, before they leave office.
And that’s an awful lot of greenhouse gases and that’s where the fight is.”
This ruling will likely be overturned in the courts, eventually – but probably not before the
coal-burning plants have been approved.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
The research team collects several samples from each stop along the route to measure the chemical composition of the ocean water. (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)
It’s called Milking the Cow – the team drops bottles to the ocean floor to take samples... then they retrieve the bottles and pour the contents into lab bottles. (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)
We hear a lot about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But half of all man-made CO2 is stored in the world’s oceans. When CO2 mixes with water, it increases the oceans’ acidity. As Ann Dornfeld reports, that acidification is moving closer toward the oceans’ fragile coastal areas:
Transcript
We hear a lot about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But half of all man-made CO2 is stored in the world’s oceans. When CO2 mixes with water, it increases the oceans’ acidity. As Ann Dornfeld reports, that acidification is moving closer toward the oceans’ fragile coastal areas:
If you’ve ever wondered why sparkling water tastes tangy, instead of just bubbly – it’s because of carbonic acid. That’s what’s produced when carbon dioxide is added to water. Some of the CO2 in the world’s oceans is natural, from things like decaying algae. But the oceans also soak up CO2 produced by cars and factories. Once CO2 is absorbed into the ocean, it sinks to the coldest, deepest water for long-term storage.
Chemical oceanographers at Oregon State University are monitoring the chemical composition of the Pacific Ocean to see where the carbon is being stored. On a research vessel several miles off the coast, they lower a series of bottles down to the ocean floor on a winch.
(sound of winches)
Scientists have expected that upwellings would eventually bring some of that CO2 to the coastal zones that are home to a huge array of marine life. They thought it would take a century or more. But a recent study, published in the journal Science, found acidic water fewer than 20 miles off the Pacific Coast.
Grad student Rachel Holzer says that’s alarming.
“The ocean is normally at a very stable pH. It is a buffered system, which means it is not very easy for the pH to change. But recently there’s been evidence that ocean acidification is happening, meaning that the pH is dropping. And that can be very harmful to biological life of all different types.”
Corrosive water can dissolve the calcium carbonate shells of barnacles, mussels, oysters and clams. Coral reefs are also calcium carbonate. So are a lot of planktonic species, including terrapods. Those make up about half of the diet of young salmon.
Burke Hales co-authored the latest study. He’s an Associate Professor of Chemical Oceanography at Oregon State.
“The question is how are these organisms going to respond, you know? Do their shells dissolve, do they just not grow as quickly? If their shells are negatively impacted, are the organisms themselves negatively impacted? And if the organisms are negatively impacted, how does that cascade through the food web?”
Hales says stopping ocean acidification would be extremely difficult, if not impossible.
“There are people who have talked about going out in the ocean and spraying sodium carbonate pellets into the water, which would dissolve and neutralize some of the carbonic acid. Sort of like when you take a Tums, that’s the active ingredient in Tums is calcium carbonate. That’s one idea that’s been proposed. It’s really, really speculative that that would work.”
What’s more, Hales says the process of hauling all of that ocean antacid out to sea and dispersing it could produce as much CO2 as it would neutralize.
“It is depressing. We wish things weren’t this way and moving sort of irreversibly towards worse conditions. But we also know that the oceans do have a lot of ability to adapt. And what we don’t know yet is exactly how this is gonna play out.”
One thing scientists do know is that the acidification has just begun. The corrosive water they found right off the Pacific Coast was from carbon dioxide released about 50 years ago. And over the last half century, CO2 production has only increased.
The new, efficient oxygen catalyst in action in Dan Nocera's laboratory at MIT
(Photo courtesy of MIT and NSF)
We hear a lot about the coming
hydrogen economy. Hydrogen has a lot of
promise because it’s a clean burning gas.
But, for the most part, you have to burn
dirtier fossil fuels to make hydrogen.
Scientists can produce hydrogen from water.
But the process is expensive. Julie Grant
reports on new science that has researchers
buzzing:
Transcript
We hear a lot about the coming
hydrogen economy. Hydrogen has a lot of
promise because it’s a clean burning gas.
But, for the most part, you have to burn
dirtier fossil fuels to make hydrogen.
Scientists can produce hydrogen from water.
But the process is expensive. Julie Grant
reports on new science that has researchers
buzzing:
MIT researcher Daniel Nocera has found a cheaper way to get hydrogen
from water molecules. Researchers already have been able to do this – but
only with a precious metal – platinum. It costs nearly $2000 an ounce.
Nocera’s team discovered a material based on cobalt that does the same job.
Cobalt costs more like $2 an ounce.
James McCusker is an expert on solar energy conversion at Michigan State
University. He says the discovery has researchers excited.
“A, it works. But B, it works in such a way that it’s very, very easy to put
together. And it’s made of very inexpensive materials. They’re really
potential game changers in this field.”
McCusker says there’s still a lot of work left before we’re ready for a
hydrogen economy.
The new research was published in the journal Science.
Environmentalists warn the Endangered Species Act is in danger during the last months of the Bush Administration (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
The Bush administration is making a proposal that environmentalists
say will weaken the Endangered Species Act. The proposal would eliminate a
requirement for independent review of big federal projects such as highways,
bridges or dams. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The Bush administration is making a proposal that environmentalists
say will weaken the Endangered Species Act. The proposal would eliminate a
requirement for independent review of big federal projects such as highways,
bridges or dams. Lester Graham reports:
Right now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service
reviews anything like that that could harm endangered species.
The Secretary of the Interior says the existing regulations create unnecessary conflicts
between agencies and delays on important projects.
The new proposal would let the agency in charge of construction decide for itself if the
project would affect an endangered species.
Bob Irvin is with the environmental group, the Defenders of Wildlife. He says this
proposal eliminates safeguards.
“Previously the Fish and Wildlife Service had a role in reviewing the impacts of those
actions. So, literally, what the administration is proposing is to put the fox in charge of
the chicken coop.”
That’s not the way the Department of Interior sees it.
Kaush Arha is a Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Department of Interior. He took
issue with the fox in charge of the chicken coop metaphor.
“I think that’s an exaggerated statement. And it is unfounded hyperbole. What you are
referring to as “fox” in that particular issue are very, very well qualified, very well
respected and dedicated natural resource management agencies like the U.S. Forest
Service, like Bureau of Land Management, Army Corps of Engineers and others.”
But, no matter how dedicated those wildlife officials are, the Bush administration has a
reputation of putting political pressure on scientists in several agencies, and science
has been changed or rigged in favor of industry.
But the Interior Department says the agencies operate within a political environment.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Arha says, besides, the agencies already make decisions
about federal projects and the Endangered Species Act this way. The proposed
changes would just make current practices clearer for the agencies without completely
overhauling the procedures.
“This captures the existing practices, clarifies and gives more direction and it is narrowly
tailored to do so.”
Environmentalists such as Bob Irvin see something much more sinister than the
administration making things clearer for the different agencies affected by the
Endangered Species Act.
“With barely five months left in the administration, they’re trying to ram through a
proposal to weaken the Endangered Species Act. This is completely in keeping with the
anti-environmental record of this administration. But it is also completely outrageous.”
Environmental groups likely will end up taking the issue to court. The Bush
Environmental Protection Agency tried a similar attempt to by-pass independent
review. The federal courts struck that effort down.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Fourth-grade teacher Robin Frisch-Gleason on a research trip to Antarctica (Photo courtesy of Robin Frisch-Gleason)
Fourth-grade teacher Robin Frisch-Gleason on a research trip to Antarctica (Photo courtesy of Robin Frisch-Gleason)
Fourth-grade teacher Robin Frisch-Gleason on a research trip to Antarctica (Photo courtesy of Robin Frisch-Gleason)
Kids can watch all kinds of TV shows, movies,
and DVDs about science and nature. But it’s not the
same as talking to a researcher who’s actually been
to remote places in the world. Kyle Norris reports
when that researcher is your fourth-grade teacher it
makes everything very real:
Transcript
Kids can watch all kinds of TV shows, movies,
and DVDs about science and nature. But it’s not the
same as talking to a researcher who’s actually been
to remote places in the world. Kyle Norris reports
when that researcher is your fourth-grade teacher it
makes everything very real:
Okay, so guess where we are.
“Good morning, Slausson School. Good morning.”
It’s a school assembly.
So the woman talking is Robin Frisch-Gleason. She’s a fourth grade teacher. And before
that she was a geologist. And she loves polar regions. She says she loves their vastness
and their emptiness.
A couple months ago she went to Antarctica to study the rocks. And to learn more about
how to teach kids about polar regions.
Now that’s she’s back, she does stuff like this assembly, and tells kids about her trip.
This is her explaining how geologists drill the ice and then pull-up core samples of rock.
“I explain it by saying think about putting a straw in milkshake. You put a straw down.
The very top of the milkshake is the top of the seafloor. And then you press down, maybe
to bottom of cup, and when you cover the straw with your finger and pull it back up, you
have a core of milkshake. And that’s just like we take up a core of rock.”
She says the rocks are like a book, and they tell a story about the past. The scientists in
Antarctica are actually reading the rocks. And they’re trying to find out if the ice melted
when the climate got warmer in the past. So that they can predict what will happen to the
ice as the climate continues to warm in the future.
Robin Frisch-Gleason wants to kids to know that polar regions are vulnerable to climate change.
“And they should be aware of it, and as they grow up it should influence their decisions, their
voting, their career choices, and their own personal behaviors.”
But ultimately she wants to make learning fun. And like alive. Back in her fourth-grade
classroom, the kids do a lot of hands-on activities.
(clapping)
Like imitating the way penguins communicate through penguin calls. But in this case, by
clapping their hands in a certain pattern, and trying to find other kids who have their
same pattern.
In another activity, they wear different types of insulated gloves – like a glove lined with
cotton, or a glove lined with fat – and they stick it into icy water, to see which is warmer.
“It’s fun to stick your hand in things. It’s hands-on like he said, it’s fun doing hands-on
stuff, it’s fun trying out different things. And it’s fun because you’re really trying to
experiment on stuff. You’re experimenting with science and it’s really fun at the same
time.”
Plus the kids say that it’s cool having a teacher go to Antarctica and come back and teach
everybody all these cool things. They say it’s even given them some street-cred amongst other kids at
other schools.
Here’s 4th grader Cole Magoon:
“And it’s kind of like have a famous person be your teacher.”
The kids say that doing fun, hands-on activities actually makes them want to pay more
attention. And this kind of learning not only sparks their critical thinking and problem-
solving skills, but it’s also a great way to get kids psyched about science and math. And
learning from a person who’s actually been in the field seems to amplify all this.
And it gets kids thinking about the world they live in, and the world they’ll have to take
care of.
The classic photograph of the Earth, taken by the Apollo 17 crew on December 7, 1972 traveling toward the moon (Photo courtesy of NASA-JSC Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth)
Climate change is already affecting crops,
forests, water and wildlife. That’s according to
a new government report. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Climate change is already affecting crops,
forests, water and wildlife. That’s according to
a new government report. Lester Graham reports:
Climate change is not something that’s coming. It’s here, according to a report from the
U.S. Climate Change Science Program.
Peter Backlund is one of the chief authors of the new report.
“What was really striking was just how many different changes have been documented
and how much is changing more rapidly than we would have expected ten or fifteen
years ago. And we’re seeing widespread impacts sooner than we expected.”
The report basically says for every good thing climate change brings, there’s something
bad.
Faster growing crops, but more crop failures. Warmer winters mean livestock
survive better, but then hotter summers will be harder on the animals. And there are already
more forest fires and more insects killing trees.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Michaels' book about industry's influence on science. (Oxford University Press)
Bisphenol-A, in bottles like these, is one instance where Michaels says companies are calling for more data, even though the picture is clear (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
There’s a lot of confusion about global
warming. Is it real or not? Are the ingredients
in our food, our soap, the household products we
use all safe? Even if they’re not, there’s a
whole industry that’s working to make you, and
Congress, uncertain. David Michaels recently wrote
about this. His book is titled ‘Doubt is Their
Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens
Your Health.’ Lester Graham talked with Michaels,
who says companies today base their approach on the
tactics of big tobacco. The tobacco companies
successfully obscured the connections between
smoking and lung cancer for decades.
Transcript
There’s a lot of confusion about global
warming. Is it real or not? Are the ingredients
in our food, our soap, the household products we
use all safe? Even if they’re not, there’s a
whole industry that’s working to make you, and
Congress, uncertain. David Michaels recently wrote
about this. His book is titled ‘Doubt is Their
Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens
Your Health.’ Lester Graham talked with Michaels,
who says companies today base their approach on the
tactics of big tobacco. The tobacco companies
successfully obscured the connections between
smoking and lung cancer for decades.
David Michaels: “Companies know that by putting off the scientific debate for as many years as
they can, they can keep doing the work that they’re doing and not be disturbed. It works.”
Lester Graham: “We hear about Bisphenol-A in plastics, of course we hear about mercury in fish,
phthalates, even something like dioxin – industry scientists say ‘we’re safe, these are in minute
quantities’ or ‘the jury is out on just how dangerous this chemical is’. If they are dangerous, why
doesn’t the government make that determination and phase these products out?”
Michaels: “Well, right now, the Bush administration has absolutely abdicated its responsibility to
protect the public’s health and the environment. It’s not even a question of phasing them out, the
Bush administration has turned a blind eye, and said ‘we’re not even going to think about those
chemicals’. I’m hoping that as public consciousness of this increases, we’ll have more demand on
regulatory agencies to do something.”
Graham: “You’re very critical of the Bush administration in the book, saying scientific review
boards are stacked with industry officials. Why, or how, does the scientific community continue to
allow that?”
Michaels: “Well, the scientific community doesn’t have the power to stop it. But the scientific
community has me furious about this. And over and over again, not just individual scientists, but
mainstream science organizations, like the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
have issued statements, have passed resolutions complaining, criticizing the Bush administration.
But that’s all we can do. Congress has to stop it. And, the American public has to stop it.”
Graham: “The members of the Bush administration often point out, ‘hey we can’t make knee-jerk
reactions, over some single study, or even a small group of studies, we really need to rely on
sound science, this needs more review’. And it sounds like common sense to many of us.”
Michaels: “Well, when I hear the Bush administration call for ‘sound science’, I see what they’re
doing is calling for something that sounds like science, but isn’t. Bisphenol-A is a great example.
There are well over 100 studies showing that this causes endocrine disorders and reproductive
disorders in laboratory animals. And there are less than a dozen studies that say it doesn’t cause
it. The question we have to ask is: should we be exposing our babies, our children, ourselves to
potentially toxic chemicals that we don’t know that they’re safe?”
Graham: “And Bisphenol-A is, of course, used in plastics, in liners of canned foods, and so forth.
It’s a product that we come across a lot.”
Michaels: “Not only that, the studies are right now that 90% of us have Bisphenol-A in our body.
We can tell that from studies where we’re are excreting it in our urine. So, it’s out there are we’re
being exposed to it. We don’t know what the effects are, but since it causes harm in animals, why
should we be exposing ourselves to it?”
Graham: “You note that journalists are often the victims of their own determination to get both
sides of the story. What are you suggesting? That journalists ignore industry when it questions
studies or scientific method? That would assume that corporations are always bad actors.”
Michaels: “No, but I think it’s very important to note, for example, when an industry scientist
criticizing the study, to note, for example, that, you know, that this criticism is being paid for by the
industry. But the other criticisms, which are, you know, are independent, often paid for by the
government through grants to universities, are independent, and therefore have a lot more validity.
We have example after example, in the book, and all through the medical literature, of companies
that essentially create studies that provide the results they want. In my reviewing it, I’ve never
found a study which disagrees with what the sponsor wanted them to hear. It’s just overwhelming.”
An EPA scientist testing online sensors for water distribution systems (Photo courtesy of the US Office of Management and Budget)
Scientists at the Environmental Protection
Agency say government appointees have interfered
in scientific decisions. Rebecca Williams reports
the scientists say political pressure has become
more common during the past five years:
Transcript
Scientists at the Environmental Protection
Agency say government appointees have interfered
in scientific decisions. Rebecca Williams reports
the scientists say political pressure has become
more common during the past five years:
In a survey, more than 800 scientists reported interference in their work by
government officials. They say political appointees have used data
selectively to influence policy decisions, and ordered scientists to alter
information.
One scientist anonymously wrote, quote: “Do not trust the Environmental
Protection Agency to protect your environment.”
Francesca Griffo is with the Union of Concerned Scientists – the group that
conducted the survey. She says political interference with science has
happened before the Bush Administration.
“But I do think and what we have from the scientists themselves is this idea
that it’s gotten much, much worse, much more pervasive, much more common than it’s
ever been before.”
The EPA did not respond to calls for comment. But it’s been reported the
agency has said it carefully weighs the input of staff scientists in policy
decisions.
Faith learned about the use of many herbs for home remedies from her father in Louisiana when she was a small girl. (Photo by Kyle Norris)
Hot pepper tea is one of the herbal remedies handed down generation to generation. Some scholars are worried knowledge of the use of many herbs is being lost. (Photo by Kyle Norris)
Nature’s Products is one of the few stores where people can buy the herbs they need for traditional home remedies. The owner says his customers are his best teachers. (Photo by Kyle Norris)
When most of us get sick we go to the doctor and get medicine. But
some people are holding onto the old ways of healing. And many
people think we could learn a lot from the old ways. Kyle Norris has
this story:
Transcript
When most of us get sick we go to the doctor and get medicine. But
some people are holding onto the old ways of healing. And many
people think we could learn a lot from the old ways. Kyle Norris has
this story:
The small store is called Nature’s Products. It’s in a neighborhood with
a lot of abandoned buildings and store-front churches. When you walk
inside the store, the smell of incense clings to your clothes.
Green plants hang in the windows, and there are jars and jars of bulk herbs lining
the shelves.
Gary Wanttaga opened the store thirty years ago. He’s always been
interested in natural healing techniques and herbal medicine. That all
might sound new-agey, but this place is not new-agey at all. The
reason Wanttaga opened the store in his hometown of Detroit was
because he wanted to help the people who lived here:
“In lot of urban areas people are very limited on resources. They’re limited
with money. They’re limited with shopping resources. And this is one way
that I try to give back to the community”
Wanttaga says one of the main reasons he’s stayed in Detroit is because of
his customers. They’re some of his biggest teachers. Many of his
customers are older African-Americans. They came from the South to work
in the factories during World War II. When they came they brought with
them a cultural knowledge of herbs and natural healing techniques.
One of his customers is 72-year-old Faith. That’s her legal name – just
“Faith.” She grew up in a segregated farming community in Louisiana. Her
father was a farmer, and he taught her all about the herbs:
“I’m the youngest child of all, so I’m the baby. And he would often let me
ride on his shoulder. And sometime I’d be saying ‘Papa, what is this?’ and he
would tell me what that was, we’d be walking through the fields and he
would tell me what was, and he would tell me different things, what you use this for
what you use that for. I had 100 questions. Boy, I was a kid I had a 100
questions.”
She says back then, everyone knew about the herbs, and everyone used
them. At that time, people who were poor or black or who lived in rural
areas did not often have the option of going to a doctor. And so they turned
to the plants and trees around them for medicine, and they developed a great
knowledge about what did and didn’t work to keep people healthy:
“The pine tree was used for many things. Because it’s one of things where
you get turpentine from. It was definitely used for healing. And we used
turpentine for sores. And it works today! If you get a cut and you put
turpentine on it immediately as soon after you hit it, it will never be sore.”
Herbs were out first form of medicine. That’s what Suzanna Zick says.
She’s a naturopathic physician who teaches at the University of
Michigan. She says we have a collective knowledge about herbs that’s
thousands of years old. She says when you compare that to what
modern-day science knows about herbs, it’s not much of a comparison:
“In a sense we have just a tiny little window that science shows us, as
compared to the long use.”
Zick says we could learn a lot from these folks and the knowledge they
have, but not many researchers are studying people like the customers
here in Detroit:
“I think that we can actually learn what herbs they’re using a lot of and
what for. Because I think those are probably the ones that would be of
most interest. In particular, it’s a good question too if they’re using
them with conventional medications, it’s for safety issues. But also if
this is their primary health care for some of them, if it’s working, then
this is a very inexpensive way of providing health care for people who
might otherwise get none.”
Everyone we heard from in this story said the same thing. For us to
have good health, the old-school ways of healing can work hand-in-
hand with modern-day doctors and science. But the people who know
about the herbs are growing older and dying, and their knowledge is dying with them.
A new study finds if fish raised in captivity breed with fish in the
wild that might hurt the wild fish populations. Rebecca Williams
reports that’s because the captive fish are genetically weaker:
Transcript
A new study finds if fish raised in captivity breed with fish in the
wild that might hurt the wild fish populations. Rebecca Williams
reports that’s because the captive fish are genetically weaker:
Billions of fish are raised in hatcheries and released into lakes and
rivers.
But a new study in the journal Science says there could be
problems with that. The researchers found a type of salmon bred in
captivity quickly adapted to their less stressful life in the hatchery.
So they weren’t prepared for a cutthroat life in the wild.
Michael Blouin is an author of the study. He says the babies of
captive-bred fish have trouble finding food and aren’t very good at
escaping predators.
“If you have large numbers of hatchery fish mixing with wild
populations, the fear is they’ll be passing those genes to the wild
population and thereby dragging down the fitness of the wild
population.”
Blouin says this has not been proven outside of the laboratory yet, but he says the lab results raise some concerns about the widespread
use of captive fish to boost wild fish populations.
Memos from Bush political appointees are telling government scientists there's no way to make a connection between specific greenhouse gas emissions and endangered wildlife, so don't going looking for one. (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
