Tag: environmentalists

‘Greener’ Cars Won’t Save Us From Sprawl

Many feel that cars powered by fuel cells will save us from a future of pollution and rising oil prices. But Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator James Howard Kunstler says there’s more to think about… he says it’s time to reconsider not just WHAT we drive but HOW we live:

Transcript

Many feel that cars powered by fuel cells will save us from a future of pollution and rising oil
prices. But Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator James Howard Kunstler says there’s
more to think about and that it’s time to reconsider not just what we drive but how we live:


For quite a while now it’s been fashionable among the environmentally-minded to decry the
ownership of SUVs. This says a lot about what’s wrong with the conventional thinking of the
progressive / green crowd.


Would the everyday environment in America be any better if it were full of compact cars instead
of giant gas-guzzling Chevy Denalis and Ford Expeditions? I don’t think it would make a bit of
difference, really. We’d still be a car-dependent society stuck in a national automobile slum. The
problem with America is not big cars, it’s the fact that cars of all sizes have such an
overwhelming presence in our lives, and that driving is virtually mandatory for the ordinary
business of daily life.


Many in the anti-SUV crowd assume that we will solve our car problem with new technology,
like hydrogen fuel cells. Or that low-emission, environmentally-friendly hybrid cars will help to
usher in a sustainable way of life in America.


In fact, cleaner-running, higher mileage cars would do nothing to mitigate the degraded public
realm of a nation that has become a strip mall from sea to shining sea. They would not lessen
commuting distances or times. They would not reduce the number of car trips per day per
household. If anything, they would only promote the idea that we should continue living this way
– that suburban sprawl is normal and desirable, instead of what it is: the most destructive
development pattern the world has ever seen, and a living arrangement with poor prospects for
the future.


Why do we believe that better-running cars will save us? Because environmentalists are stuck in
a culture of quantification, just like their corporate bean-counter adversaries. It’s easy to count up
the number of carbon dioxide molecules in a cubic foot of air, and reduce the whole car issue to
good air or bad air. But air pollution or miles-per-gallon are hardly the only problems with car
dependency. The degradation of the everyday environment in general and of public space in
particular is at least as important, and is not subject to statistical analysis. It’s a question of
quality, not numbers.


In the age of austerity and global strife that is coming down the pike at us, we are going to need
walkable neighborhoods, towns and villages and public transit systems that are a pleasure to use.
Many of us pay premium prices to vacation in European cities precisely because they offer this
way of living, with great railroad and streetcar systems. Europeans still have cars, but they’re not
sentenced to own one per family member or spend two or three hours every day in them. It
would be nice to have these options here in the USA.


In the meantime, I really don’t care whether Americans drive Humvees or Toyota Priuses. Both
big and small cars are cluttering up our everyday world and wasting our lives.


James Howard Kunstler is the author of ‘The City in Mind: Notes on the Urban Condition’ and
other books. He comes to us by way of the Great Lakes Radio Consortium.

Modified Crops Swap Genes With Weeds

Genetically modified crops are planted throughout the Midwest, but some scientists are concerned genes from these crops could escape and work their way into weedy plants. With these genes, weeds could become more vigorous and harder to kill. New research shows this can happen between closely related crops and weeds. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Cristina Rumbaitis-del Rio prepared this report:

Transcript

Genetically modified crops are planted throughout the Midwest, but some scientists are
concerned genes from these crops could escape and work their way into weedy plants. With
these genes, weeds could become more vigorous and harder to kill. New research shows this can
happen between closely related crops and weeds. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Cristina
Rumbaitis-del Rio prepared this report:


Genetically modified crops have been around for quite a while. In the U.S. last year more than 88
million acres were planted with genetically modified soybean, corn, cotton and other crops. Some
of these plants are engineered to be more resistant to herbicides, making it easier for farmers to
get rid of weeds without damaging their crop. Others are engineered to resist plant-eating insects.


But some scientists worry about the ecological effects of these crops. Allison Snow is a professor
of ecology at Ohio State University. She studies genetically modified sunflowers. Snow says she
got involved in this research when genetically modified crops were first being introduced because
she was afraid no one else was looking at the environmental effects of these crops.


“It was kind out of a fear factor for me of wanting to make sure that someone was watching to see
what the environmental effects might be.”


The sunflowers Snow studies have a gene added to them, which produces an organic insecticide
that kills insects feeding on the plants.


According to Snow, the problem with these pesticide-producing sunflowers is the insect-killing
gene can be transferred from crop sunflowers to their weedy cousins, which are often growing on
the edges of fields. Bees, flies and other insects can transfer the gene to the weeds by cross-
pollinating the plants, which are close relatives. Snow’s research shows once the gene gets into
the weed population, the weeds become insect-resistant as well.


“The new gene worked really, really well in the weeds. It protected them from the insects. And
because they were protected, they had more energy to devote to making seeds.”


Snow says the most startling result was the number of seeds these weeds were making.


“In one of our study sites, they made 55% percent more seeds per plant – just because of one
gene. Which is kind of unheard of. We’ve never seen a result like that – where one gene would
cause the whole population to suddenly start making 55% more seeds.”


The gene might make weeding a more difficult task, but Snow says she wouldn’t quite call them
“super weeds,” a term some environmentalists have used.


“We might see that the weedy sunflowers become worse weeds, I wouldn’t call them super
weeds, because to me that would imply that they have many different features instead of just one
that causes them to make more seeds. But I could imagine in the future there might be enough
traits out there that could turn a regular weed into something much more difficult to control – like
really would be a super weed.”


Snow says she will have to do more research to see if the extra seeds made by the weeds will turn
into more weeds and hardier weeds in farmer’s fields.


But, she might not be able to finish her research on sunflowers because the companies that make
the crop have decided not to renew her funding and won’t give her access to the sunflowers or the
genes.


“It was all about stewardship and responsibility.”


Doyle Karr is a spokesperson for pioneer hi bred, one of the companies which makes the
sunflowers. He says the company realized a few years ago there wasn’t enough demand for the
product to justify commercially producing it. As a result, he says, the company couldn’t continue
funding sunflower research, and doesn’t want to be held responsible for keeping the gene safe
while the research is being conducted.


It’s an issue of a biotech trait that we are not pursuing and not bringing to the market, and if we’re
not bringing it to the market, we can’t justify taking the responsibility of having that trait out
being worked with, with a third party.”


While some academic researchers argue the universities take on legal liability when they work
with genetically modified plants, Karr says the university’s liability is often limited by state law.
He says the company is ultimately held responsible if only by the court of public opinion.


“Should something happen with this gene that was not expected or a mistake happened – that
would ultimately come back to those who initially made the gene available.”


While this issue remains unresolved, Snow is continuing her research. Genetically modified
sunflowers are not the only crop to study. Snow is now working in Vietnam where weedy species
of rice grow naturally, and where genetically modified rice might be introduced in coming years.
She’s concerned the traits of the genetically altered rice might be transferred to the wild species
of rice, just as happened with the sunflowers.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Cristina Rumbaitis-del Rio.

Canada to Join in Seaway Expansion Study?

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants funding to continue a study of expanding the St. Lawrence Seaway for bigger ships. Now amidst widespread speculation, a Canadian environmental group doubts Canada will support it. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants funding to continue a study of expanding the St.
Lawrence Seaway for bigger ships. Now amidst widespread speculation, a Canadian
environmental group doubts Canada will support it. The Great Lakes Radio Consoritum’s David
Sommerstein reports:


Canada’s role is critical to the study moving forward. In many places, the Seaway channel is in
Canadian waters and Canada owns most of the Seaway’s locks. Mary Muter is with the Georgian
Bay Association, an Ontario-based environmental group. She says Canada’s Transport Minister
David Collinette will not help pay for the study unless it beefs up its environmental approach.


“We have heard from Minister Collinette that he is only interested in funding a joint study with
the U.S. transport department that will look at the environmental impacts and that the full
scenario is looked at.”


Others say Canada will sign on. Keith Robson of the Hamilton Port Authority believes Transport
Minister Collinette is dedicated to expansion.


“My impression is that Collinette understands very much the benefits of marine transportation.”


Collinette himself has declined to comment. Transport Canada says talks with the U.S. are
ongoing.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.

Bike Commuters Coast Through Winter Weather

  • Winter cyclists in Ottawa brave the weather on their daily commutes. (Photo © Richard Guy Briggs)

By the first snowfall, most of us have long ago put our bicycles away. But in every city, there are a few die-hard souls who keep pedaling all winter long. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly offers a profile of the winter cyclist:

Transcript

By the first snowfall, most of us have long ago put our bicycles away. But in every city, there are
a few diehard souls who keep pedaling all winter long. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Karen Kelly offers a profile of the winter cyclist:


I remember the first time I saw a winter cyclist in Ottawa. It was during a snowstorm and I had
just moved to the capital city of Canada. I looked out my window to see a guy on a bike plowing
through a snow drift. He had one glove on the handlebars – and the other carrying a three-foot-long art portfolio. It was outrageous. But even more surprising – Ottawa is full of these people.


We’re talking a good four months of frigid temperatures here. And there are bicycles on the road
every single day. I wanted to know what could possibly motivate someone to hop on a bike when
the temperature is well below freezing.


To find an answer, I went to see Juergen Weichert. He’s a 37-year-old father. A website
developer. And an avid winter cyclist.


“Okay, ready honey, why don’t you bring me your snowpants now?”


It’s 8:30 on a Monday morning and Weichert is preparing for his first ride of the day, transporting
his four-year-old daughter to daycare.


Weichert is a rare breed – not only does he climb on a bike in the middle of winter – he drags his
kid along too. Unfortunately, guests are also invited. Next thing I know, I’m trying to fit a bike
helmet over my ski cap.


“It definitely fits different, right? What you can do is actually pull out these things.”


Weichert says you should dress in layers that are easy to remove. Once you start pedaling, and
sweating, the biggest challenge is often to stay cool and dry.


Today, it’s just below freezing, so Weichert throws on a long sleeved t-shirt, a fleece vest, and a
windbreaker with vents under the armpits. He hustles his daughter into a snowsuit and we’re out
the door.


As soon as we reach the driveway, Weichert is smiling.


He eagerly brushes the snow off his bicycle.


“It just brightens my day. It’s so sunny and beautiful and fresh out here and you get a little bit of
exercise, a little bit of warmth in your body, gets
the system going, and I realize if I don’t drive for a day or two, I realize
afterwards I’ve been typically crabby if I don’t get my morning ride.”


“Let’s hop in!”


Weichert covers his daughter with blankets in a trailer that he pulls behind his bicycle. Then he
and I hop on our bikes, inching them towards the top of the driveway, which is covered with ice.


“Probably the most dangerous spot right here on this whole ride is that patch down at the bottom
of the driveway. This up here has all been in shade, it’s been wet and now it’s frozen. Once we
get out on the main road, we’re going to have dry pavement.”


“Here we go!”


We slowly make our way over the frozen tire tracks. It reminds me of cross country skiing or
skating. Weichert tells me to steer and brake, but preferably not at the same time.


(squeak of tires on road)


It’s actually pretty easy. And on the street, the conditions range from packed snow to dry
pavement. Weichert sticks to the bare road – even if that means taking over the lane. By law,
cyclists here have the right to do that. And the city actually encourages it – to make sure that
drivers see people on bikes.


But between the cars and the weather, it’s not surprising that most people assume that winter cycling
is dangerous. Researcher Lisa Routhier decided to take a closer look at that assumption. She
recently earned a degree in environmental studies from Carleton University in Ottawa. Routhier surveyed 60 winter cyclists and 62 people who don’t ride in the winter. She
calculated the number of riders with the number of collisions and found no increase in collisions
during the winter months. And generally, Routhier found the people on the bikes aren’t really
worried.


“One of the questions I asked was do you feel safe when you’re riding your bike in the winter and
82 percent responded that they feel safe all or most of the time when they’re on their bike. And what I
found and what many people will notice is that on many days during the winter, the roads are
actually bare and dry curb to curb. There’s no difference from summer cycling conditions.”


But what distinguishes many winter cyclists from the rest of us is experience. Routhier says these
are people who are used to commuting, regardless of the traffic or the weather. Juergen Weichert
fits that description. He says he’ll always choose his bicycle over the car. For a number of
reasons: It’s a way to exercise. It saves money on gas. And it’s better for the environment. But
mostly, he says he just loves being outside.


“One day I was riding not that long ago… there
must have been 200 little blackbirds sitting on a lawn and as I drove by on my bike, one of them
took flight and then the whole flock took flight and as I drove by, they flew right over the top of my
bike and over my head and I thought ‘wow,’ I could hear their wings beating, I could hear every
little feather going past me and the wind rushing and I thought, that’s amazing. You’re never
going to experience it that way in a car.”


(sound of riding)


We have an uneventful ride, and Weichert drops his daughter off at daycare. Even on a frigidly cold day,
he’ll choose the longer, scenic route to the office. Today is no exception.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Congress to Approve Seaway Expansion Study?

Congress is considering spending up to 2-million dollars for a long-term study of widening and deepening the Saint Lawrence Seaway. Opponents say an expansion of the Seaway will only mean more environmental trouble for the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports:

Transcript

Congress is considering spending up to 2-million dollars for a long-term study of widening and
deepening the Saint Lawrence Seaway. Opponents say an expansion of the Seaway will only
mean more environmental trouble for the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Mike Simonson reports:


The bone of contention is a multi-year study that looks at allowing larger ocean-going ships to get
through the Seaway. The Seaway links the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean. The National
Wildlife Federation’s Rick Spencer in Washington says that would rip up the Saint Lawrence
River and stir up pollution from Montreal to Milwaukee.


“Dredging hundreds of millions of cubic yard. Blasting islands. You are destroying fish habitat,
you’re going to be releasing toxic sediments. You’re going to increase the risk of new invasive
species.”


Right now channels are 25 feet deep. The study will look at digging 10 feet deeper, allowing
ships to take on more cargo at less cost. Duluth Port Director Davis Helberg says the protests are
exaggerated.


“We’re talking about a study. We’re talking about an analysis that will focus on engineering,
economics, and on the environmental aspects of keeping the Seaway competitive in the long
term.”


The proposal is in the House and Senate conference committee and will be decided later this
month.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mike Simonson.

Report Says Water Worries Overstated

The international commission that keeps an eye on the environmental health of the Great Lakes will hold public hearings later this month on a report that looks at water use in the basin. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports, the findings are not pleasing to some environmentalists:

Transcript

The international commission that keeps an eye on the environmental health of the Great Lakes
will hold public hearings later this month on a report that looks at water use in the basin. And as
the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports, the findings are not pleasing
environmentalists:


The International Joint Commission asked a team of experts to examine water issues including
use and diversion, climate change, and conservation. The report says the problem of water
overuse in the Great Lakes has been overstated in the past three decades, while conservation has
been underestimated. It also calls the prospect of diverting water to arid southwest states “a dead
issue.”


Cameron Davis is with the Lake Michigan Federation. He says the report fails to recognize the
issues that will face the Great Lakes in the long term.


“One of the concerns that I have is that, in saying we’re not using that much water, that the
hidden message is don’t worry. We don’t have a problem.”


But the U.S. chair of the IJC, Dennis Schornack, says recognizing the pitfalls of faulty
projections is important to shaping future water policy.


The Commission will hear public comment on the report before drafting its own plan to present
to the governments of Canada and the U.S.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Report Gives Nafta Mixed Reviews

In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, established an agency to monitor the environmental effects of trade between the U-S, Canada, and Mexico. In a new report, the agency gives NAFTA mixed reviews. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein explains:

Transcript

In 1994 the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, established an agency to
monitor the environmental effects of trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. In a
new report, the agency gives NAFTA mixed reviews. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s David Sommerstein explains:


The Commission for Environmental Cooperation found little evidence overall of what
environmentalists’ most feared from NAFTA – more pollution and lower environmental
standards. The study finds trade-related advances in technology have, in some cases,
helped the environment. But it attributes to NAFTA more air pollution from trucks at
border crossings. And businesses seeking out lax regulations can create pollution
hotspots. The report points to a 400% rise in hazardous waste shipments to Canada as an
example.


Chantal Line Carpentier is a spokesperson for the CEC. She says all three countries need
strong laws to make NAFTA environment-friendly.


“It’s not only an agreement on trade and goods, it’s also on investment, so that you need
to have the policy in place and also the flexibility to put policy in place as soon as there’s
some sort of hotspot that develops.”


Still, environmental groups remain concerned that competition for investment will trump
environmental policy when it comes free trade.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.

New Air Regs to Allow More Pollution?

According to data from the EPA, air pollution from older, dirtier power plants leads to thousands of premature deaths each year. Now, environmental watchdog groups worry that recent changes to Clean Air Act regulations will allow these aging power plants to continue to pollute. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie MacDowell reports:

Transcript

According to EPA estimates, air pollution from older, dirtier power plants leads to thousands of
premature deaths each year. Now, environmental watchdog groups worry that recent changes to
Clean Air Act regulations will allow these aging power plants to continue to pollute. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie MacDowell reports:


Most of the coal-burning power plants in the Midwest are more than 25 years old.


Under EPA regulations, called New Source Review, these grandfathered power plants would
have to install modern pollution controls if they undergo any major upgrades.


Recently, the EPA relaxed standards on New Source Review regulations.


The EPA says the changes will cut through a lot of red tape and will provide flexibility for power
plants to improve and modernize their operations.


But environmentalists say the Bush Administration is catering to big business.


Howard, Lerner is Executive Director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center. He says the
changes to New Source Review regulations will let old power plants stay dirty.


“This is a break that’s being given by the Bush Administration for the coal industry, for the
utilities, the oil refineries and it comes down to a classic case of what’s good here for some of the
highly-polluting power plants is bad for the public when it comes to clean air and good health.”


Meanwhile, a group of Northeastern states that say they receive air pollution from Midwest
power plants plans to file suit challenging the changes.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Annie MacDowell.

Environmental Cloak and Dagger

Keeping track of polluters in a country as large as Canada poses a serious challenge. Truckloads of hazardous waste cross the border with the U.S. every day, logging companies work near protected wildlife, and smoke from factories fills the air; but the Canadian government has a new weapon in the fight against polluters. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports on Canada’s growing team of environmental spies:

Transcript

Keeping track of polluters in a country as large as Canada poses a serious challenge. Truckloads
of hazardous waste cross the border with the U.S. every day. Logging companies work near
protected wildlife. And smoke from factories fills the air. But the Canadian government has a
new weapon in the fight against polluters. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly
reports on Canada’s growing team of environmental spies:


“We’re just coming up to this facility on the right-hand side here now.”


Brad May slows down and scans the area surrounding a squat concrete building. It’s owned by a

company that was once under suspicion for illegal dumping. We’ve come here so that May can give

a sense of what happens when he places a company under
surveillance.


“As you can see, its a fairly old factory in a fairly industrial area in the north of Toronto

that’s
involved in the recycling and reconditioning of containers used for paints and coatings and
lubricants and that sort of thing.”


May pulls into a nearby driveway obscured by weeds. As he sips a cup of coffee, he looks like a
typical investigator – right down to the khaki uniform. The guy in the back seat, however,

probably wouldn’t get a second look. He’s wearing jeans and
a plaid shirt. And he lets May do most of the talking. His name is Mark Pomeroy. And, not
surprisingly, he’s the spy. Out on surveillance, he doesn’t have much to say. But he does point

out an 18-wheeler that’s
parked a shipping container in front of the building.


“You’ll notice here you have a container and the container has various bunch of
numbers on it. That’s very good information. What shipping line did it arrive from, who’s hauling
it as far as the carrier is concerned and you can find out if the items they’re receiving would
indeed be something we’d be interested in looking at as far as a potential violation is

concerned.”


Pomeroy searches for trends in industries where there’s an incentive to pollute.

For instance, if the price of pork drops, he’ll watch for hog farmers looking for a cheap way to
dump their manure, or mechanics might be offering great deals on freon, a highly regulated

chemical that’s used in
old air conditioners. That could prompt a visit to some local garages in search of illegal

imports. A lot of times, Pomeroy teams up with customs officers, the police and

Environment Canada investigators.
He says his job is different than that of a typical officer. He tries to anticipate the next

wave of environmental crime.


“Whereas they might focus on one specific case, intelligence would look at that and say, you’re
dealing with this type of a problem, is that prevalent with these types of companies…which in turn would say, okay inspections, don’t just
focus on this particular company. Look at A,B,C,D companies also.”


Here in his office, Pomeroy locks the door before he settles into a comfortable chair.

There’s a bit of a James Bond feeling here.

Secrecy is highly valued.

There’s even white noise piped throughout the building, to reduce the chance of being overheard.

As he talks about whistleblowers and anonymous tips, it’s clear that Pomeroy loves his job.


“I like law enforcement. I find it kind of a stimulating challenge to see somebody who thinks
they’re so smart that they’re doing this and they’re getting away with it, and it’s very gratifying to
actually go after that type of a person, exposing them and if it’s a violation, prosecuting

them.”


Pomeroy is one of six environmental spies in Canada and part of the only environmental
intelligence unit in the world.

The unit was created in 1998 to improve enforcement of the new laws enacted under the
Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

It’s a big job, but for Pomeroy, the best part is when he’s working in the field.
He cultivates informants – looking for internal whistle blowers and unhappy competitors. And
he’ll trail suspicious cars and conduct drive-bys on companies to gather information. Pomeroy
says his main goal is to find the big fish operating in the shadows of an industry.


“The big thing for an intelligence officer is to look at the unknown community. Are there people out there
who have never come forward and gone through the process of registering with us or gone
through the licensing or noticing permits? It’s up to me to see if they are actually out there

and
are they circumventing our regulations.”


But Pomeroy has been hampered by the fact that he’s the only environmental spy in the province
of Ontario.

That’s soon to change. He’ll be joined by a second spy as Environment Canada doubles the size
of its intelligence unit.

That’s welcome news for environmentalists like Jerry DeMarco. He’s the managing lawyer with
the Sierra Legal Defense Fund. And his group argues that the Canadian government is not
enforcing its own environmental laws.

The group filed a complaint under the North American Free Trade Agreement. And an internal
government report backed up their claims.

DeMarco says the new officers are arriving at a crucial time.


“They need more resources for two distinct reasons. One is they haven’t had enough to enforce
the laws that do exist and also there’s been the passage of several new laws and regulations in

the
past few years that also require enforcement staff.”


For instance, Canada is adding new chemicals to its list of toxic substances. That’ll mean more
work for the investigators who track them.


Mark Pomeroy acknowledges it’s still a fledgling operation. And he’s spending much of his time
building trust – with industry sources, law enforcement, and even environmental groups,
but he’s confident that trust will translate into valuable information – which will make it

tougher
for companies that continue to break the law.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Eliminating Mercury in Sewage Treatment

A city along Lake Michigan is fighting the construction of a waste-treatment plant. The town filed a lawsuit against the local waste-treatment company that wants to dry and burn sludge from half the surrounding county. City officials say they don’t want an eye sore on their lake front and environmentalists are worried about mercury getting into the lake. But the sanitary district says it has a system that will virtually eliminate emissions. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie MacDowell reports, environmentalists say that’s not enough:

Transcript

A city along Lake Michigan is fighting the construction of a waste-treatment plant. The
town filed a lawsuit against the local waste-treatment company that wants to dry and burn
sludge from half the surrounding county. City officials say they don’t want an eye sore on
their lake front and environmentalists are worried about mercury getting into the lake.
But the sanitary district says it has a system that will virtually eliminate emissions. As
the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Annie Macdowell reports, environmentalists say
that’s not enough:


After rolling out of bed in the morning, what’s the first thing you do? Do you use the
toilet? Take a shower? Brush your teeth? Probably one or all of the above. And what
happens to that unwanted dirty water? It just vanishes, right? Flushes into oblivion?
Disappears down the drain? Wrong. All that scummy sludge heads straight for your
local waste water treatment plant.


The North Shore Sanitary District along Lake Michigan in northern Illinois receives 187
tons of waste water a day. That adds up to 20 trillion gallons of the stuff a year. And in
among all that waste there are 26 different toxic metals. At this point, North Shore is
trucking the toxic sludge to landfills and dumping it. Brian Jensen is the general manager
of North Shore. He says toxic chemicals aren’t necessarily safe in a landfill because a
landfill liner can leak.


“If in fact, that liner were to leak, and there’s been a history around our country and in
Europe that these liners do leak, when that happens, the environmental liability is
extremely significant.”


With these worries in mind, a couple of years ago Jensen started looking around for a
new way to dispose of the sludge. He says a process called “sludge-drying” was the best
option.


Here’s how the system works: the sludge is pumped into a dryer where most of the water
is sucked out. Then the dried sludge is burned as fuel for the next part of the process –
the melter. The melter burns up the organic part of the sludge at 3000 degrees. That’s
hot enough to melt heavy metals. So after everything else is burned away, what remains
are the toxic metals locked up in a glass matrix that looks a lot like lava. It’s called glass
aggregate. It can be used in concrete where it’s sealed and can no longer pollute water or
soil.


The only toxic metal that doesn’t go into the glass matrix meltdown is mercury. That’s
because in the hot melter, mercury becomes a vapor. Over the course of the year, north
shore gets about 33 pounds of mercury – a third of it comes from fillings in people’s
teeth. The rest is from industry and commercial sources.


People in the area and environmentalists, object to the idea of the plant emitting all that
mercury into the air. That’s because it could further contaminate Lake Michigan which
already is contaminated by mercury from coal-burning power plants. Cameron Davis is
the head of the Lake Michigan Federation. He says mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin.


“You know the MadHatter in Alice in Wonderland? That character was developed
because in the old days, people who made hats actually used mercury in the hat
manufacturing process, and that mercury being around it in the manufacturing of hats,
would cause people, literally, to go insane, to go crazy.”

Davis says Lake Michigan already has a fish advisory because mercury has contaminated
the water so badly. If people eat the fish, especially expectant mothers and children,
there could be serious health effects. Mothers could pass mercury poisoning onto their
infants. Children’s bodies are especially susceptible because they’re developing so fast.
Davis says anyone who cares about the environment is against the construction of any
new source of mercury emissions.


But Brian Jensen says the North Shore sludge incinerator will fix that problem too. The
plans include a filtration system, to catch mercury in the vapor state. The air travels
through carbon canisters and the mercury particles cling to the carbon. The canisters last
for up to 5 years and then the mercury is recycled and reused. The result is something
less than two pounds of mercury emissions a year. Jensen says that’s such a small
amount that today’s scientific instruments can’t detect it in the normal emissions each day.
They’ve tried. And in the end, Jensen says it could very well be that the new North Shore
Plant will emit no mercury at all.


But Cameron Davis says any uncertainty is unacceptable.


“We do want to encourage different ways to be able to get to zero and if we are in fact
getting to zero, then we’ve got a different game here, and that’s important, but we are
talking about zero.”


But Davis doesn’t have any better ideas for getting rid of the sludge. He says North
Shore should continue landfilling for now.


Michael Murray with the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes Office says there is
a better alternative. It’s a process called land application. That’s when sludge is used as
fertilizer for crops.


“There’s a study published on work in France recently where they looked at number of
different options for sewage sludge treatment and they found that land application in
general had the lowest environmental cost, in other words it was the best environmental
option.”


Murray says companies must have a really good pre-treatment program if they’re going
to use land application. That means capping levels of toxic metals before they get into
the sludge.


Brian Jensen at North Shore says he looked into land application and saw too many
problems. He says North Shore already has an award-winning pre-treatment program,
but they still get too many metals to land apply. And he’s heard about problems like e-coli bacteria growths from the fecal matter in the sludge. Beyond that, he says they just
have too much sludge and not enough land to fertilize.


Jensen says he’s confident the judge will not let the lawsuit stop north shore sanitary
district from building the plant. It already has the permits from the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency. He’s amazed that people are giving north shore such a hard time,
when right next door to where they want to build the waste treatment plant, a coal-burning incinerator emits up to 450 pounds of mercury a year.


“The North Shore Sanitary District is truly people that are concerned about the
environment. And this process, even though it probably, it does, in fact, cost a little more
to own and operate than a landfill, the environmental gains, I’m saying the environmental
gains, not losses, are significantly greater than any other sludge disposal method.”


Jensen says environmentalists should be the first to recognize when a waste water
treatment plant is doing the very best job that’s possible with the most recent technology
available instead of criticizing the effort.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Annie Macdowell.