November, 2009 - The Environment Report

Part 1: A Long History of Dioxin Delays

In 1981, Valdus Adamkus was appointed to a regional Environmental Protection Agency office. One of his jobs jobs was to study dioxin pollution that got into the Great Lakes. His office compiled a report that said dioxin is a cancer risk, and that a Dow Chemical plant in Michigan was responsible for some dioxin pollution. (Photo source: Dantadd at Wikimedia Commons)
Historial dioxin pollution from Dow Chemical spread throughout approximately fifty miles of a river system that discharges into Saginaw Bay, part of the Lake Huron. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

Dioxin pollution has been present in a
watershed in central Michigan for more
than thirty years. People around the
country might think it’s just a local
issue, but there was a time when this
very same pollution problem made national
news. In the first part of a series
on Dow and dioxin, Shawn Allee met the man who took the issue to Congress
and who feels it should make news again:

Transcript

In 1981, President Ronald Reagan appointed Valdus Adamkus to a regional Environmental Protection Agency office. From the get-go, one of Adamkus’ jobs was to study dioxin pollution that got into the Great Lakes. His office compiled this report that said dioxin is a cancer risk, and that a Dow Chemical plant in Michigan was responsible for some dioxin pollution.

Adamkus says his bosses in Washington called this report “trash.”

Adamkus: “We simply refused to retreat from our findings.”

Allee: “Did they ask you to retreat from your findings?”

Adamkus: “Yes, unfortunately we almost got instructions, let’s use a very mild word, to change our report. And that brought us Congressional hearings, which probably the entire country was watching on TV networks.”

Koeppel (ABC Archive ): “An official at the EPA today said the Dow chemical company was allowed to participate in the redrafting of a report on dioxin contamination that had been critical of Dow. And that official charged that Dow’s involvement was at the direction of the EPA’s acting chief.”

That was March 18, 1983, and ABC’s Ted Koeppel wasn’t the only one covering the Congressional hearings.

All the TV outlets caught this line from Adamkus –

Adamkus ( ABC Archive ): “It’s unethical, unusual, unprofessional to get the internal document approved by outside company.”

So, higher-ups in the EPA allowed Dow to edit the report critical of the company. But, in some ways, Adamkus won. His boss got ousted and Ronald Reagan gave Adamkus a civil service award for integrity.

As for Dow Chemical’s involvement?

For a month, I asked for comment.

A Dow spokeswoman said the company was interested in talking about the future, not the past.

Adamkus eventually left the EPA and he became President of Lithuania. But back in the US, there was a surprising follow-up to his fight over dioxin.

Mary Gade was a young staff attorney back when Adamkus was on TV. Twenty-three years later, President George W. Bush appointed her to Adamkus’ old job. When Gade arrived – dioxin was still a problem in Michigan.

“My staff in the region characterized this as probably the worst dioxin contamination in the country.”

And, she saw it as a national issue.

“You’d like to expect that your government will function appropriately, that corporations will act responsibly and that you can be assured of a safe and healthy environment for you and your family.”

So, Gade ordered Dow Chemical to clean up some hot spots.

“They would either do the work themselves or the federal government would go forward and do it on their own, and then go back and sue Dow to cover our costs.”

Michigan politicians complained about Gade, and some state officials felt some of her actions were counterproductive. In May 2008, she was forced to resign.

Gade told the Chicago Tribune, it was for being tough on Dow.

The EPA hasn’t commented on that, and Dow denies any involvement.

Recently, Mary Gade’s old boss, Valdus Adamkus, returned to his old EPA office to say hello. He asked about the dioxin problem in Michigan, and he learned it’s still around – after all these years, and after all the trouble he and Mary Gade got from it.

“When I hear from them what enforcement actions are being still considered, and that they are not big progress in that respect, that’s what really bothers me and to me this is inexcusable.”

Dow and the EPA are negotiating a final resolution on cleanup right now.

But Valdus Adamkus knows details need to be worked out, and he says all of this has been promised before.

“God help them. I hope this is really coming to the end.”

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Predicting the Next Outbreak

The program is supposed to identify new viruses in animals before they spread to humans. (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)

A new coalition wants to set up an
early warning system for diseases
that pass between animals and humans.
Samara Freemark reports
some research institutions and conservation
groups are launching the PREDICT program:

Transcript

Organizers hope the program will help prevent the spread of diseases like avian flu, ebola, and swine flu. PREDICT researchers will work in disease ‘hotspots’ overseas.

Program director Stephen Morse is an epidemiologist at Columbia University in New York. He says the program will identify new viruses in animals before they spread to humans.

“We don’t even know how may emerging viruses, let alone other infectious organisms there are out there in nature, but the number must be large.”

The PREDICT program will also create better global disease warning systems.

“This is really essential to our survival as well as something very important to understand if we want to be able to control infections in the future.”

Morse hopes the program will help governments stop local outbreaks before they become global pandemics.

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

Preview: The Trail of Dioxin and Dow

A Dow Chemical sign on the Tittabawassee River stating 'Enter At Your Own Risk' (Photo by Vincent Duffy)
A sign on the Tittabawassee River, downriver from Dow Chemical Plant, stating to avoid contact with the soil and not eat the fish due to dioxin contamination (Photo by Vincent Duffy)

If you learned your town was polluted
with toxic waste, you’d just want to
get it cleaned up. That’s not how things
have worked out with dioxin contamination
in central Michigan. Dioxin’s been a problem
for at least 30 years, but the Dow Chemical
Company, the federal government, and
the state of Michigan are just now hashing
out final cleanup plans. We had Shawn
Allee tour the area to see the
extent of the problem and what’s at stake
for the rest of us:

Transcript

I wanted to begin my tour with interviews at Dow’s chemical plant in Midland. That’s where dioxin and related compounds were created: the dioxins were by-products of chemical manufacturing.

After a month of calls and emails to Dow, a spokeswoman said the company was interested in talking about the future – not the past. But the past is the reason there’s a problem now.

So, I start my tour a bit downstream.

Michelle Hurd Riddick picks me up near the plant. She’s with The Lone Tree Council, a Michigan environmental group. We follow the Tittabawassee River and the path dioxins took over time.

“This is Freeland Festival Park. Freeland is kind of like a bedroom community of Midland.“

Hurd Riddick says fishing is a huge past time in Michigan – but dioxin’s made it complicated.

Allee: “There’s a fish-advisory sign right there.“

Riddick: “Right. So, they’re telling you to not eat the fish.“

Actually, the signs tell you which fish to avoid, and how much to eat, or not. The US Environmental Protection agency worries dioxin causes cancer and diseases that affect immune, reproductive, and developmental systems.

“Pregnant women shouldn’t eat any, children under a certain age should only eat it once a month.“

Fish advisories cropped up in 1978. That’s after Dow warned Michigan and the federal government about dioxin in the Tittabawassee River. While the plant’s dioxin pollution is well below federal limits, the old dioxins are still around, and they’re not just in the river.

Allee: “Where we coming up here?“

Riddick: “This is Imerman Park, it’s on the Tittabawassee, too, and it’s very frequently flooded.“

Flood waters leave behind contaminated silt. Dioxin’s been found in the soil of yards and in parks like this. One worry is that kids would get exposed by getting dirt in their mouths.

Riddick: “Those are the hand washing sinks. They put the sinks there to use the hand-washing sink to wash their hands as a way to mitigate their exposure.“

Allee: “There’s the sign – contamination advisory: avoid contact with soil and river sediment. Please use soap and water to wash off soil and sediment.“

Other parks and some yards had soil scraped and removed. Dow cleaned up several dioxin hot-spots in recent years. Michigan and the US EPA want more of a top-to-bottom effort. That might include a sweep of fifty miles of river and part of the Great Lakes.

Riddick: “This is the Saginaw Bay of Lake Huron. As a child, I came up here a lot. I’m sure someplace I have a picture of me near these trees.“

Riddick’s middle-aged now. The dioxin was in rivers and Lake Huron before she was born. No one knew that far back. But residents did learn about the problem thirty years ago. Today Dow, the US EPA and Michigan are still debating a final solution.

“We’ve had many, many starts. If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say this is how we’re going to achieve this cleanup, I’d be a wealthy woman.“

Hurd Riddick says the whole country should care about how this plays out.

Riddick: “People need to care about how this process because could play out in your community.“

Allee: “Maybe not dioxin but something else?“

Riddick: “You want to know that that the people your tax dollars are paying to protect you are the ones calling the shots.“

A final dioxin-clean up could take more than ten years. Michelle Hurd Riddick says she can wait that long – if it’s done right.

But she says it wouldn’t hurt if the clean-up got started now.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Protecting Art From Climate Change

Climate change can affect temperature and humidity. And those changes can damage art. (Photo source: Aude at Wikimedia Commons)

Preservationists are worried climate
change could destroy valuable art
and cultural artifacts. Kyle Norris
reports thay are looking at ways to
protect these valuables:

Transcript

Preservationists are worried climate
change could destroy valuable art
and cultural artifacts. Kyle Norris
reports thay are looking at ways to
protect these valuables:

Climate change can affect temperature and humidity. And those changes can
damage art. Debbie Norris is the chair of the art conservation department
at the University of Delaware.

“Fluctuations in temperature and relative humidity can cause art
materials to crack and craze and deteriorate over time.”

Changes in the weather can also cause biological growth on artifacts. So,
for example, mold can grow on old photos or damage historic documents.

Some buildings that house art are very old and made of stone or wood.
Those building materials are deteriorating faster than they have in the
past. And many of those buildings are not equipped with heating and
cooling equipment advanced enough to control the climate inside the
buildings. That puts the collections they house at risk.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kyle Norris.

Low Flow Showers Put to the Test

By 2013, the EPA estimates that there’s going to be 36 states that will face catastrophic water shortages. (Photo courtesy of Energy Star)

Even if it meant saving a lot of hot water,
many people would rather stick with their
old showerheads. That’s because low-flow
showerheads often don’t measure up. Lester
Graham met up with Greenovation TV’s Matt
Grocoff to put new showerheads to the test:

Transcript

Showers use a lot more water than you might think. At 2.5 gallons a minute, a ten minute shower means 25 gallons of heated water.

Matt Grocoff has been testing some new shower heads in his home in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He says if you’re not thinking about saving water now, chances are you will be.

“By 2013, the EPA estimates that there’s going to be 36 states that will face catastrophic water shortages.”

Matt says, you might have tried a low-flow shower head before and gave up on it.

Matt: “With old school low-flow shower heads, it was a huge sacrifice. They didn’t work. They just constricted the flow. With these new high-tech shower heads that have been completely re-designed, they’re so much better you’re going to sacrifice zero comfort.”

Lester: “We’re going to test your theory, ‘cause we brought our resident skeptic. Jessi Ziegler’s our Production Coordinator at The Environment Report. And, what do you like about showers?”

Jessi: “I am a self-proclaimed shower snob. Long. Hot. High-pressure.”

Matt: “I guarantee you, you’re going to consider these showers a luxurious shower.”

Lester: “Let’s check it out.”

(sound of walking)

The first shower head Matt shows us is a Bricor.

Matt: “The one we have here uses only 1 gallon-per-minute.”

Lester: “Roll up your sleeve. Let’s get in there.”

Jessi: “I don’t know. The pressure is not as high as I would like. I mean, I want it to feel like a fire hydrant just got opened up, and this is a little bit drippy for me.”

Matt: “Alright, so you’re going to need a little bit more than this one?”

Jessi: “I need more oomph.”

Matt: “Let’s first go try the one down in the basement.”

(sound of stairs)

The second model is a Hansgrohe–Croma which uses 1.6 gallons-per-minute.

Matt: “Now that one’s going to have a whole lot more flow, but feel just as good as a 2.5.”

Jessi: “Okay. We’ll see about this. (sound of shower) Eh, it’s okay. It’s alright.”

Matt: “You are tough.”

Jessi: “I am tough. I mean I grew up with high school locker room showers. I’m used to like 1950s – whoosh – five-million gallons-a-minute.”

Matt: “Is it a good drenching shower, this one?”

Jessi: “It does have a wide surface area. That’s nice.”

We head up to the second floor where Matt has one more chance to impress Jessi with this new generation of high efficiency shower heads. Jessi: “Okay. (sound of shower) That feels better. You’re right, you did save the best for last. The oomph is there.”

Matt: “Alright! So with that oomph, would you say that’s as good as the shower head you have at home?”

Jessi: “It’s up there.”

Matt: “What if I told you if you replace your shower head, this shower head will save you $100 a year on your utility bill.”

Jessi: “It would really save me $100 a year?”

Matt: “For the average sized home, changing one single shower head will save you over 11,000 gallons of water. But it’s not just saving water, it’s saving you hot water. And so it’s saving you electricity or gas to heat that.”

But, Matt says there’s a problem. You can’t get these new generation shower heads just anywhere.

Matt: “I’m not going to lie to you. These shower heads, right now, are cutting edge. They’re not that easy to find. The good news is soon you’re going to be able to see these in your Home Depots and everywhere else. Right now, you can go online and buy these. And you can go to Greenovation.TV and find some places where you may be able to purchase these yourself.”

Lester: “Cost?”

Matt: “Cost – anywhere between $30 to a $100 for the highest-end Bricor.”

Lester: “So, are you persuaded, Jessi?”

Jessi: “$100 a year, that’s quite a bit of money.”

Lester: “That’s Jessi Ziegler and Matt Grocoff with Greenovation-dot-TV. Thanks very much, Matt.”

Matt: “Thank you, Lester. And here’s to happy showering!”

Lester: “For The Environment Report. I’m Lester Graham.”

Taking Back the ‘Take Back’ Law?

19 states have passed ‘take back’ laws that require manufacturers to take back old electronics and pay to recycle them. But manufacturers are challenging these laws. (Photo source: dirkj at Wikimedia Commons)

The City of New York is being sued
by the electronics industry. Samara
Freemark reports it’s over recycling
electronic waste, such as cell phones
and computers:

Transcript

The city of New York is being sued by the electronics industry. Samara Freemark reports it’s over recycling electronic waste such as cell phones and computers:

Electronic waste contains all sorts of hazardous chemicals, but safely recycling it is expensive.

So 19 states have passed ‘take back’ laws that require manufacturers to take back old electronics and pay to recycle them.

Now manufacturers are challenging these laws. Two industry groups have sued New York City. They want the city’s take back law overturned.

Kate Sinding is a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council. That group has joined New York in the suit. She says a decision in the case could have consequences beyond electronics take backs.

“There are a lot of deeper questions that are raised by the lawsuit, including issues of corporate responsibility. If somebody’s going to produce something that has toxic components, what is their ongoing responsibility to deal with that, even after it’s sold into the market?”

The court will decide that next year.

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

Big Oil Attacks Senator Graham

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina (Photo courtesy of Senator Graham)

Tackling a climate change bill is the next big issue for Congress. And special interest groups are going on the offensive. Mark Brush reports big oil is going after Republican Senator Lindsey Graham for working with Democrats on a climate change bill:

Transcript

This ad comes from the American Energy Alliance – a group backed by oil and natural gas companies.

“There are some scary stories coming out of Washington. The latest is Senator Lindsey Graham’s support for a new national energy tax called cap and trade.”

But by working with democrats on a climate bill, Senator Graham says his main goal is to make the country more energy independent.

There are people coming to his defense.
They like the fact that he’s sitting down with the other party.

Michael Couick is the President of the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina.

“I think we’ve got to get smart folks in Congress to talk to each other, reason together. Otherwise we’re not going to be able to solve a problem, that if we don’t do anything by default we’ve got an energy policy that will not work for the long term.”

Some in the Republican Party say Senator Graham is selling out.
He was recently called a traitor at a town hall meeting in South Carolina.

For The Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Interview: The Incomparable Honey Bee

A Honey Bee. (Photo source: Erik Hooymans at Wikimedia Commons)

You could thank a honeybee for the last meal you ate. Bees help produce about one out of every three bites we eat. But worldwide bees are dying at a rate never seen in history. Lester Graham talked with Reese Halter about the decline of the honeybee.
Doctor Halter is a biologist and the author of the book The Incomparable Honeybee and the Economics of Pollination:

Transcript

Doctor Reese Halter: We do know that we have a problem. 50 billion bees are missing.

Lester Graham: What kind of economic benefit is the bee to food production in, let’s just say, the US?

Halter: Enormous. I’ve given conservative numbers for food, for medicine, for clothing. Directly, the honeybee accounts for, at least, 44 billion per anom. Now, if you go to the cotton growers’ main site, they’ll tell you that, in cotton alone, America does well over 100 billion in commerce. The cotton plant cannot exist without the bee.

Graham: Now, bees have been hurt in the last few decades. We’ve seen a couple of different invasive mites really decimate the bee population, and now we’re seeing this colony collapse disorder. Can you tell us what you think some of the causes might be?

Halter: There’s no one smoking gun. We’ve got a collision of events that have happened. We have insecticided, fumigated, miticided, pesticided ourselves almost right through oblivion. We’ve got electromagnetic radiation coming at them. We truck bees on semi-tractor trailers around our nation – they’re on, like, a Nascar circuit – where we don’t even allow them, for goodness sakes, to eat honey, we stoke them up with high-fructose and corn syrup, because it costs too much to feed them honey, for goodness sakes. And they’re sick. We’re overworking them. We’re losing billions of them. And we’ve reached a point now where there are mites, where there are bacterias and viruses, and, at the end of the day, not dissimilarly to human-beings, the bees’ auto-immune systems are shutting down.

Graham: What can we do about that?

Halter: In a nutshell, I think we need to step back here, and we need to look at all the different problems. And I think where I get really excited, Lester, is corporate America – corporate America – gets this. And they get it with Sam’s Club, they get it with Safeway, because organics – organics – you know, we can grow stuff. We can grow anything without having to nuke the Earth with petro-chemical-derived fertilizers and insecticides. When we ramp the scale of economy up, as we’ve done throughout America, in our supermarkets, and, incidentally, organic foods and organic products are the fastest growing in the United States of America. 24 billion last year. So when it ramps up the price per unit goes down. And there are all these organic bays in almost every food store now. So, please, consider supporting it. Certainly buy organics in season. And, it is very affordable.

Graham: Reese Halter is the author of ‘The Incomparable Honeybee’ published by Rocky Mountain Press. Thanks for talking with us.

Halter: Thank you, Lester.

Sparring Over Water in the South

A federal judge ruled that if Florida, Georgia and Alabama don’t come to a water agreement by 2012, Atlanta has to stop taking drinking water from Lake Lanier. (Photo courtesy of the US EPA)

It’s called “the economic engine of
the South.” Atlanta, Georgia’s population
has exploded in the last two decades.
But with that growth has come environmental
problems, like where to get enough drinking
water. Georgia, Florida, and Alabama
have been fighting over who gets how
much water from rivers that flow through
the states. And, as Tanya Ott reports, a
decision in the federal lawsuit could effect
communities across the country:

Transcript

Atlanta draws millions of gallons of drinking water each day from nearby Lake Lanier. But Alabama and Florida say it’s such a water hog, there might not be enough water sent on downstream to cool power plants or protect the seafood industry.

“I had no idea! (laughs) I didn’t really realize there was a problem.”

Atlanta-area resident Connie Brand says she knew the state was in a drought last year. She knew she was supposed to conserve water, and she did.

“Not taking such a long shower; not doing small loads of laundry.”

But only recently did she realize how big a problem this could be.

In July, federal Judge Paul Magnuson ruled that under the law Lake Lanier was intended only for things like navigation and flood control – not drinking water. He said if Florida, Georgia and Alabama don’t come to a water agreement by 2012, Atlanta has to stop taking drinking water from Lake Lanier.

“The action of a court could create a public health emergency that would probably rival the effects of Katrina.”

That’s Charles Krautler. He’s director of the Atlanta Regional Commission. He says in the past 25 years Atlanta’s population has more than doubled to 4 million residents and there’s no way to get water to people without Lake Lanier.

“How do you decide who doesn’t have water and who does? Our chairman likes to say, ‘FEMA doesn’t have enough trucks to bring in enough bottled water to deal with the shortfall that would exist.’”

It’s not just an issue for Atlanta. There are more than two dozen similar reservoirs around the country. They were built for navigation, flood control or hydropower. But communities are using them for drinking water. Congress might have to step in to basically retro-actively approve the drinking water use. Cindy Lowery is executive director of the Alabama Rivers Alliance.

“If it goes to Congress, which the court case says that it might have to, it could get even more political and more chaotic really.”

Several members of Congress have said they won’t act until Florida, Georgia and Alabama come to a deal. But Lowery says, so far, the negotiations have been dominated by government agencies and special interests like power companies. She wants a panel of neutral advisors and scientists to study the issue.

In the meantime, Atlanta residents like Connie Brand are left wondering what will happen.

“I’m from a family when they grew up they relied on cistern water, and when it rained you had water, and when it didn’t rain, you didn’t have water. So I’m familiar with having to ration and be careful about those kinds of things. But I don’t think my child or people of my generation, their children, have any concept of conservation of water or anything like that.”

Brand says she just might have to step up her own conservation efforts.

“What was it we had in college? If it’s yellow let it mellow, if it’s brown flush it down? (laughs) that’ll be our new motto! (laughs)”

For The Environment Report, I’m Tanya Ott.

Americans Using Less Water

We use about 410-billion gallons of water a day in the U.S. (Photo courtesy of the US EPA)

Even as the population grows, the
US is using less water. Lester
Graham has the numbers from a new
report on water use from the US
Geological Survey:

Transcript

Even as the population grows, the
US is using less water. Lester
Graham has the numbers from a new
report on water use from the US
Geological Survey:

We use about 410-billion gallons of water a day in the U.S. But, water use per person is down. And, total water use for the nation is down about 5% from 1980 to 2005, the latest year covered by the report.

Susan Hutson is one of the authors of the Geological Survey report. She says there are a lot of factors affecting water use.

“Water conservation education, a public policy that supports that water conservation, and inovative technology, primarily in irrigation and the generation of thermo-electric power, the use of water for the cooling.”

There are still some problems. Some agricultural areas are using water faster than aquifers can be replenished. And, as we build more power plants -the biggest users of water – it will mean more demand in the future.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Month: November 2009

Part 1: A Long History of Dioxin Delays

Transcript

Related Links

Predicting the Next Outbreak

Transcript

Related Links

Preview: The Trail of Dioxin and Dow

Transcript

Related Links

Protecting Art From Climate Change

Transcript

Related Links

Low Flow Showers Put to the Test

Transcript

Related Links

Taking Back the ‘Take Back’ Law?

Transcript

Related Links

Big Oil Attacks Senator Graham

Transcript

Related Links

Interview: The Incomparable Honey Bee

Transcript

Related Links

Sparring Over Water in the South

Transcript

Related Links

Americans Using Less Water

Transcript

Related Links