State governments facing major budget problems are being urged to look for ways to trim their bottom line. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports that some say simply flipping a switch will save taxpayer money:
Transcript
State governments facing major budget problems are being urged to look for ways to trim their
bottom line. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports that some say
simply flipping a switch will save taxpayer money:
Most state governments not only have deficits for the current fiscal year, they also face deficits
for the coming budget cycle. Environmental groups say the states can patch a bit of their budget
hole by switching to more efficient light bulbs and turning off lights and computers when no
one’s in govenment office buildings. In Wisconsin, the Public Interest Research Group says the
state could save between nine and eighteen million dollars a year. Group director Kerry
Chumann admits that some conservation moves require changing people’s behavior.
“But I think we haven’t even done first step of putting a policy in place to say let’s do this. Let’s
cut our energy costs by doing simple things.”
For the longer term, Schumann also backs energy saving ideas that may take some major up-front
investments. Those include getting rid of gas guzzling state cars and switching to alternative
fueled vehicles.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Chuck Quirmbach reporting.
Scientists are talking about a new way to address global warming. Their idea is to take carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants and inject it deep into the earth. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie MacDowell explains:
Transcript
Scientists are talking about a new way to address global warming. Their idea is to take carbon
dioxide from coal-burning power plants and inject it deep into the earth. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Annie Macdowell explains:
It’s called carbon sequestration. The idea is to use a chemical process to remove carbon dioxide
from power plant emissions and pressurize it into a liquid form. The liquid would then be injected
into saline aquifers up to ten thousand feet below the ground.
The government wants to create 4 to 10 regional partnerships to study the possibility of carbon
sequestration. One of the potential sites is in the Illinois Basin. The basin extends throughout three
quarters of Illinois, into Western Indiana and Western Kentucky.
Robert Finley is the director of the Center for Energy and Earth Resources at the Illinois State
Geological Survey. He says carbon sequestration could be a good transition for the country as it
moves away from using fossil fuels.
“It would allow us to use coal in a more environmentally responsible way while we look toward the
future with additional use of renewables and ultimately, perhaps, going to a hydrogen economy.”
Finley says at this point, sequestration doesn’t work with other pollutants found in power plant
emissions, such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and mercury.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Annie MacDowell.
Soon you’ll be seeing a label on some lights that you might buy for your house. The label will warn that the light bulbs contain mercury. It’s the result of a five-year court battle. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Soon you’ll be seeing a label on some lights that you might buy for your house. The label will
warn that the light bulbs contain mercury. It’s the result of a five-year court battle. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Fluorescent lamps need mercury to operate. But mercury is known to cause health problems. So,
keeping it out of the environment is important. The State of Vermont passed a law requiring a
label, warning of the mercury. The lamp makers fought it, but finally lost when the Supreme
Court refused to hear the case. It’s impossible to label just the bulbs sold in Vermont, so, that
means you’ll see the labels in your state too. That includes those newer energy efficient compact
fluorescent lights. Michael Bender is Director of the Mercury Policy Project and lobbied for the
Vermont law.
“We fully support and encourage people to use these energy efficient lights, but at the same time
we encourage consumers to be aware that they have mercury in them and that they should not be
disposed in the trash. Instead they should be kept intact and not broken and brought in for
recycling.”
The labels will begin appearing later this year.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
An EPA study says that less than one percent of lakes in the Upper Midwest suffer from the effects of acid rain – down from three percent 20 years ago. Air pollution officials disagree on what to do next about the harmful precipitation. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
An EPA study says that less than one percent of lakes in the Upper Midwest suffer from the
effects of acid rain – down from three percent 20 years ago. Air pollution officials disagree on
what to do next about the harmful precipitation. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck
Quirmbach reports:
The EPA credits the improvement in the health of lakes to a 1990 law that reduced sulphur
dioxide emissions, mainly from coal-burning power plants. Cutting SO2 pollution means several
things, including less disruption to the Lakes’ food chain. Now the EPA agrees with President
Bush’s call for Congress to pass his so-called Clear Skies Initiative. That plan aims for more
reductions in sulphur dioxide, as well as cuts in emissions of nitrogen oxides and mercury. But
several state air pollution regulators say the plan doesn’t go far enough. Lloyd Eagan is with the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
“Basically my feeling is that the levels in the Clear Skies Initiative really offer too little reduction
and it comes too late.”
But the EPA calls the Clear Skies Initiative a market-based, workable approach to pollution
control.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Chuck Quirmbach reporting.
A coalition of scientists is reporting that efforts to reduce radon levels in homes throughout the U.S. are largely failing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee has more:
Transcript
A coalition of scientists is reporting that efforts to reduce radon levels in homes throughout the
U.S. are largely failing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee has more:
Radon is a natural gas that emits low levels of radiation. Research has proven it can cause lung
cancer. Officials estimate 15 thousand lung cancer deaths can be traced back to radon each year
in the U.S. Congress passed the Indoor Radon Abatement Act in 1988, setting a national goal to
reduce radon in American homes to safe levels.
Peter Hendrick is the Executive Director of the American Association of Radon Scientists and
Technologists. He says the country’s radon program is ineffective, with dangerous levels of the
gas still present in ten million homes in the U.S.
“I believe that the reason behind that is because one particular agency, Housing and Urban
Development, has really not lived up to its responsibilities under the National Environmental
Protection Act to comply with EPA standards on radon.”
Hendrick is calling for the government to enforce existing laws and even create tax incentives for
compliance. Federal officials have not yet commented on Hendrick’s complaints.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Celeste Headlee.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers recently announced plans to change their policies on enforcing the Clean Water Act on some wetlands. The move is in response to a Supreme Court decision that puts limits on the federal government’s jurisdiction over wetlands. Some environmental advocates are concerned the move will put millions of acres of wetlands in jeopardy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
Transcript
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers recently announced
plans to change their policies on enforcing the Clean Water Act on some wetlands. The move is
in response to a Supreme Court decision that puts limits on the federal government’s jurisdiction
over wetlands. Some environmental advocates are concerned the move will put millions of acres
of wetlands in jeopardy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
More than ten years ago, 23 suburbs in the Chicago area wanted to convert an old stone quarry
into a landfill to combat a shortage of space to put trash. But in the 25 years since the quarry was
abandoned, it filled with water and became home to birds, fish and plants.
The federal government called the site a
wetland and blocked the landfill project citing the Clean Water Act. The Corps said the old
quarry was now an important part of the environment because it provided plant and wildlife
habitats and protected the surrounding area from floods. The communities sued the Army Corps
of Engineers over the issue.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the federal government
can’t enforce the Clean Water Act on bodies of water that were isolated and not part of a larger
water system. The five to four decision of the court put that responsibility in the hands of the
states. The U.S. EPA and Army Corps of Engineers recently released plans to abide by those
rules.
Cameron Davis is with the Lake Michigan Federation, an advocacy group focusing on
environmental issues in the Great Lakes region. He says the federal government is backing
down too quickly:
“Well, I think what we’re seeing is another example of the administration scaling back the federal
environmental protections. Especially at the time when the states simply are not well equipped to
be able to pick up where those federal protections leave off. In an ideal world, the type of
proposal we are seeing would have been done in coordination with the states. It would
have been done in a way that will not leave wetlands out to dry.”
Davis says the Supreme Court decision only specifically relates to one case, and the federal
government was too quick to expand those thoughts to other wetlands. Davis says a longer
review process of exactly which wetlands the federal government can regulate would provide
better policy and more clarity on the issue. But the EPA says it is not sidestepping its
responsibility. Ben Grumbles is with the EPA’s Office of Water. He says the agency is doing
what it feels it has to do to comply with the Supreme Court decision.
“It’s our intent to take the interpretation that is the most reasonable and the most defensible one
that is also consistent with our mission of protecting wetlands and watersheds. We are fully
committed to protecting wetlands and watersheds to the full extent under the Clean Water Act
and the Supreme Court decision.”
Grumbles says while the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are planning to abide by the high
court ruling, it will also be working with states to help them protect wetlands that fall outside of
the federal governments newly-defined jurisdiction. Grumbles also says the EPA is taking public
comment so it can better define what makes a body of water an isolated wetland. While the EPA
and advocacy groups have differing opinions of how to interpret the Supreme Court decision, the
legal debate might not be over.
Chris Shafer is a law professor at the Thomas Cooley Law
School in Lansing, Michigan. He says the high court made a mistake by
assuming isolated wetlands are not the responsibility of the federal government:
“I think the court also made a giant leap of logic by saying that, ‘Well, it’s not really a major issue
in terms of wetland protection because the states will take over this responsibility.’ That’s just
laughable because the states are not likely to take over wetland protection. It’s very
controversial, it’s very difficult, it’s very expensive.”
Shafer says the Supreme Court decision is so narrowly focused on such a small area of the law,
that clarification from Congress would remove any doubt as to where the federal government
could assert its authority in wetland issues. Right now there are no plans for such legislation, and
observers say it’s doubtful that a Republican-controlled Congress and the current administration
would address the issue. Environmental activists say in the mean time, they will turn their focus
to state legislatures to encourage them to pass laws to preserve these wetlands no longer protected
by the federal government.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.
The Canadian government is under attack by environmentalists after it exempted car manufacturers from its plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Transcript
The Canadian government is under attack by environmentalists after it exempted car
manufacturers from its plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Opponents say the government granted the exemption because the car assembly plants are located
in Ontario.
The province is a stronghold of support for the leading Liberal party.
But federal officials say the auto plants were exempted because their emissions are already low.
Many industries are required to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions under the newly signed
Kyoto Protocol on climate change.
John Bennett of the Sierra Club agrees that the auto plants are relatively small polluters.
But he’s concerned that the feds lost some leverage as they try to convince automakers to create
more fuel efficient cars.
“It was a short term political tactic, but in the long term, it might mean we won’t get the kinds of
fuel efficiency improvements in cars that are absolutely essential if we’re going to meet the Kyoto
target and go beyond it.”
Thus far, the auto industry is resistant to building more efficient vehicles.
For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
Canada now has a national law to protect endangered species. It comes after nine years of study and debate. The new law takes effect early next year. It’s designed to protect more than four hundred species and their critical habitat. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Karpenchuk reports:
Transcript
Canada now has a national law to protect endangered species. It comes after nine years of study
and debate. The new law takes effect early next year (2003). It’s designed to protect more than
four hundred species and their critical habitat. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan
Karpenchuk reports:
Among the species to be protected are the grizzly bear, sage grouse, swift fox, whooping crane,
the humpback whale and the American pine marten, just to name a few.
Canada’s environment minister says the country’s first ever national endangered species law
fulfils the international commitments Canada made under the Biodiversity Convention.
The law provides for assessing which species are at risk and calls for an action plan to save those
species which are found to be most at risk.
Some environmental groups have welcomed the law as a positive first step, and a signal that
Ottawa has finally accepted some of the responsibility for protecting species and their habitats.
But others are critical. Peter Tabuns is with Greenpeace Canada:
“It’s in the end just a public relations gesture. It will not have any substantial effect on species at
risk in Canada. It won’t fulfill Canada’s obligations under the convention on biodiversity. It is
really a lost opportunity.”
Tabuns says he’s also upset that it will be the federal cabinet ministers, not scientists, that decide
whether an animal will be placed on a protected list.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Dan Karpenchuk
Emergency money is being spent to stop an exotic invader. Some experts think the Asian carp could be a ecological disaster for Lake Michigan. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports on recent measures to stop the fish:
Transcript
Some emergency money is being spent to stop an exotic invader. Some
experts think the Asian Carp could be a ecological disaster for Lake
Michigan. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports
on measures to stop the fish:
The only thing keeping the Asian Carp from leaving the Mississippi River
system and entering Lake Michigan through a canal is an electrical barrier.
That barrier repels the fish, but a power outage could shut off the barrier, and
allow the carp to enter the Great Lakes.
The International Joint Commission and three federal agencies, including the
Environmental Protection Agency, put together 300-thousand dollars for a
back-up power source.
Tracy Mehan with the EPA says it’s important to act quickly.
“It’s a modest investment with a huge payoff in terms of avoiding, yet
another scourge to the Great Lakes fisheries. We’ve got 160 exotic species
that weren’t here in the last century and we didn’t need another one
especially something with such a high impact as the Asian Carp can have.”
Asian Carp grow up to 4-feet long and 100 pounds. They eat native fish,
and have no predator in this part of the world.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mike Simonson.
Canadians are being asked to take public transportation and turn down the heat as Canada prepares to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. From Ottawa, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly has more:
Transcript
Canadians are being asked to take public transportation and turn down the heat as Canada
prepares to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. From Ottawa, Karen Kelly has
more:
Each Canadian is being asked to reduce personal greenhouse gas emissions by 20-percent
over the next decade to help Canada meet its Kyoto target.
It will require Canada as a whole to reduce its emissions by about a third.
To help meet that goal, the government will provide incentives for Canadians to buy
more fuel-efficient cars and to better insulate their homes.
Natural Resources Minister Herb Dhaliwal says Canada needs everyone’s participation.
“This is a very small step to a very long journey and we have to make sure we get
everybody engaged at all levels – consumers, government, industry.”
The federal government plans to ratify the accord by the end of year.
But it faces tough opposition from industry and the provinces.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.