Tag: bush

Turning Brownfields Into Greenfields

  • A former industrial site is being redeveloped with parks, wetlands and homes. Residents have high hopes the new development will boost the local economy. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

As the American economy shifts away from heavy industry, each closed factory risks becoming a brownfield. That’s a site that contains potentially hazardous materials. For the past decade, the federal government has provided help in assessing and cleaning these properties. It has proved to be one of the most popular environmental programs. It’s giving hope to small towns that need help in remaking their landscapes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:

Transcript

As the American economy shifts away from heavy industry, each closed factory
risks becoming a brownfield. That’s a site that contains potentially
hazardous materials. For the past decade, the federal government has provided help in assessing and
cleaning these properties. It has proved to be one of the most popular environmental programs. It’s
giving hope to small towns that need help in remaking their landscapes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:


When a Rust Belt city loses another factory, the townspeople don’t suffer
just from the loss of jobs. They’re often stuck with crumbling buildings or even polluted land. Not to mention, the local economy isn’t strong enough to fix them up.


It’s a dilemma familiar to East Moline, a small Illinois town that sits
along the banks of the Mississippi River. Since the early 80s, the town’s lost thousands of jobs in the farm machinery
industry. Rich Keehner is the City of East Moline’s assistant administrator. He says
there is a plan for the industrial riverfront.


“Right now there’s a movement to relocate or pull industrial uses from the
river. And then of course turn that riverfront property into bike paths or some
recreational activities to improve our quality of life. And that’s exactly
what we’re doing here.”


It’s a simple idea: move industry away from the river and work with
developers to make it an attractive place to play or even live. But it’s just not that easy. Keehner says developers won’t build on these sites until it’s clear what kind
of pollution, if any, might be there.


Testing the area’s soil and water can get expensive, so sites can remain
empty for years. Meanwhile, developers look for greener pastures. Really, they can just build on farmland instead.


During the past decade, the U.S. EPA’s paid for pollution testing at hundreds
of sites. The agency also funds some cleanup and other costs. East Moline’s used several grants to develop eighty acres of riverfront donated
by the John Deere Company.


With the Mississippi riverbank at his back, Keehner points out some new
houses developed on the site.


“It’s got some great amenitities, located next to the bike path. You
can just wake up any time night or day and look out at the river. And your
neighbors are very limited; it’s very peaceful.”


The district also boasts a small light house, a lot of park space, and some
wetlands areas. Keehner says brownfields grants funded about six percent of the project’s
total cost. That doesn’t sound like much, but the money’s played a key role. He says private money couldn’t be secured until there was progress on the
environmental front.


A lot of environmentalists and civic groups applaud the program even though
a lot of credit goes to someone they often criticize. Namely, President
George Bush. His critics admit the brownfields program is one of the brighter spots of
his environmental policy.


In 2002, President Bush signed legislation that expanded the program’s
funding and breadth. Alan Front is the vice president of the Trust for Public Land, a
conservation group.


“The administration, ever since signing that bill, has budgeted about 200
million dollars a year to make this program really vibrant and so not only
have they created the wallet, but they’ve filled it in a way that really
benefits communities around the country.”


Front says the expansion’s brought a tighter focus on the environmental
needs of smaller towns. Apart from the grants, there’s another reason for the program’s popularity. The EPA trains city administrators to use federal brownfield money to
leverage private dollars.


Charles Bartsch has been teaching such courses for ten years.
He says, to compete with larger cities, smaller towns need to show they
understand their local economies.


“I suggest to towns what they should do first of all is to decide what their
competitive economic niche is.”


That means, developing around a community asset, like East Moline’s tried
with its attractive riverfront. Bartsch says, for all the progress small town administrators have made, they’re still pretty isolated. He says they need to cast a wide social net, so
they can find the best advice.


“The key thing is less knowing how to do it yourself, but more knowing who to
reliably call to walk through ideas and walk through options.”


The brownfields program does have its critics. They say it’s tilted in favor
of land development over open space and they worry about how much oversight
there is of environmental testing.


Back at the East Moline site, it’s easy to see why small towns are
participating. Residents there now have more access to the river, bike paths, parks, and,
for some people, new homes. East Moline, and a lot of other small towns like it, are seeking even more brownfields money.


They’ve got a lot of other sites that want a chance at a new life.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Corps May Cut Back on Harbor Dredging Projects

  • President Bush's proposed budget for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers might reduce the number of dredging projects, which in turn would decrease the number of accessible waterways. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

Some of the nation’s ports could be unusable for transporting commerce if a Presidential budget proposal goes through. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:

Transcript

Some of the nation’s ports could be unusable for transporting commerce if a presidential budget proposal goes through. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:


President Bush has suggested cutting about half a billion dollars from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ budget. If that happens, the Corps says it might cut dredging projects for the nation’s smaller ports. Dredging removes sediments that naturally collect in waterways.


The process makes them safe for cargo-carrying ships to pass through. Wayne Schloop is the Corps’ chief of operations in Detroit. He says economies in this region depend upon healthy ports.


“I believe it would have a negative effect on the economies because there’s a lot of harbors along the Great Lakes whose local economies are sort of tied into the marine industry and shipping and navigation.”


Schloop says ports that transport less than a million tons of goods a year could be affected. He says that includes about half of the more than 60 commercial ports in the Great Lakes.


For the GLRC, I’m Christina Shockley.

Related Links

Mercury Rule’s Impact on Great Lakes Fish

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a new rule to reduce mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants. But it might mean higher concentrations of mercury in fish in some inland lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The U.S. Environmental Protections Agency has a new rule to reduce mercury
emissions from coal-burning power plants. But it might mean higher
concentrations of mercury in fish in some inland lakes. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


The Bush administration’s EPA rule will use a cap and trade program to
reduce mercury. That means that overall mercury emissions will go down
over time, but some dirtier power plants can buy the rights to emit higher
levels of mercury. That could cause mercury hot spots. Higher levels of
mercury in nearby lakes would work up the food chain and concentrate
in fish. Mercury can cause neurological damage, especially to young
children. The toxin also can be passed on to fetuses.


Canadian studies last year already have shown higher levels of mercury in
people who regularly eat Great Lakes fish. The problem is expected to
become more severe in mercury hotspots.


Historically, walleye has had more mercury than some other types of fish in
the Great Lakes, but other large fish such trout and salmon, can also have
higher levels of mercury in their flesh.


For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Increased Funding for Great Lakes Legacy Act?

  • President Bush is calling for more money to be put into the Great Lakes Legacy Act, but some wonder if it will be enough. (Photo courtesy of the Michigan DEQ)

President Bush is recommending more money for
a program designed to clean up contaminated sediment
around the Great Lakes. But the program has a track
record of not being fully funded. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

President Bush is recommending more money for a program designed to clean up contaminated sediment around the Great Lakes. But the program has a track record of not being fully funded. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


The President says he wants fifty-million dollars for the Great Lakes Legacy
Act, beginning this fall. But last year he asked for forty-five-million dollars and
Congress only granted half of that. It was the second year in a row that
Capitol Hill failed to fully fund the five year program.


Even if President Bush succeeds getting all the money he wants this year, EPA official Gary
Gulesian says it wouldn’t cover the fourteen projects waiting for federal dollars.


“So at this point we would not be able to fund all those projects assuming
they were all appropriate and we had the local matches in place.”


Environmental groups say they’re glad to see more money proposed for
sediment clean-up around the Great Lakes. But the groups say, overall, the
president’s budget makes significant cuts in other programs aimed at
cleaning up the nation’s water and air.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Enviros Tracking Bush’s Environmental Actions

  • While many may be closely watching President Bush's foreign policy, environmental groups are still keeping an eye on actions the Administration is taking on the environment. (Photo by Eric Draper courtesy of whitehouse.gov)

The big environmental groups are assessing President George
W. Bush’s record on the environment. Mostly, they’re giving him poor marks. But after the Bush win in November, the real question is whether enough people care about the low rankings. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports:

Transcript

The big environmental groups are assessing President George W. Bush’s record on the environment. Mostly, they’re giving him poor marks. But after the Bush win in November, the real question is whether enough people care about the low rankings. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


With the country at war, a lot of people note President Bush has bigger issues than the environment to address. Greg Wetstone is a spokesperson for the environmental group, Natural Resources Defense Council. He says the Bush administration has been dealing with environmental regulations – quietly dismantling them.


“I think there has been a very concerted effort by the Bush administration to make these changes happen in a way that does not receive much public scrutiny.”


Wetstone says the NRDC’s most recent report on the Bush administration might not cause policy changes right now, but it does serve a purpose.


“This report, which is really an effort to document what’s happening because, you know, the day will come when we’re going to need to go back and try to fix as much of this as possible.”


And the environmental group says once the people realize the damage that’s being done to the environment, they’ll want it fixed.


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

Related Links

Administration Stays Course on Global Warming

  • Many scientists are finding that much of the Arctic's ice cover could melt by the end of this summer. However, the Bush Administration cites a few reasons why compliance with the Kyoto treaty is still not a favored option. (Photo by Michael Slonecker)

Despite warnings that global warming is causing the
Arctic to warm up at twice the rate of the rest of the world, the Bush administration is not changing its policies on emissions in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Despite warnings that global warming is causing the Arctic to warm up at twice the
rate of the rest of the world, the Bush administration is not changing its policies
on emissions in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


Earlier this month 300 scientists presented a four-year study that concluded the
Arctic was warming up right now. The report indicated the northern ice cap was already
diminished by 15 to 20 percent, and by the end of this century half of the Arctic’s summer
ice cover would be melted and polar bears could be nearly extinct. The study predicted that
the wildlife in the Arctic and the people who depended on it for food would be in dire straits.


But even with the new evidence that the Arctic is facing worse warming than first predicted,
the Bush adminsitration is not changing its course. The White House has indicated the U.S.
would lose too many jobs and have to restrict its economy more than other nations such as
China and India if it were to adhere to the Kyoto global warming treaty. So far, the Bush
administration has agreed only to fund further research on the issue.


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

Related Links

Greens React to Bush Re-Election

  • The re-election of George W. Bush has many environmental groups worried. (Photo by Judi Seiber)

Environmental groups worry that the Bush administration will further dismantle environmental protection laws during its next term. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Environmental groups worry that the Bush administration will further dismantled environmental protection laws during its next term. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


The big environmental groups have been very critical of George W. Bush’s first term in office. Despite speculation that the President will take more moderate positions in this next term, environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council are skeptical. Greg Wetstone is the NRDC’s Director of Advocacy.


“We have to prepare for the worst and we’re hoping for something better. We would like to see this president use the election as an opportunity to embrace more broadly the support for environmental protection held across the public. But, we can’t be naïve.”


In a letter to NRDC’s members, the group’s president took it a step farther, writing that -quote- the White House attacks of the past four years are but the leading edge of a much broader assault that will come in a second term. Other environmental groups are expressing similar skepticism.


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

Related Links

Groups Sue Bush Administration Over Wildlife Rule

  • The Bush Administration has decided to make some changes on the National Forest Management Act, and many environmental groups are not pleased about it. (photo by Stefan Nicolae)

Environmentalists are suing the Bush administration for repealing rules that protect wildlife in national forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Environmentalists are suing the Bush administration
for repealing rules that protect wildlife in national
forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham reports:


During the Reagan administration, regulations were
put in place that required the Forest Service to
ensure non-timber resources such as water, wildlife
and recreation were given due consideration and that
the wildlife be managed to maintain viable populations.
Tim Preso is a staff attorney for Earthjustice, one of
the groups that filed the lawsuit in federal court.


“Now, through a quiet rule-making, the Bush
administration is proposing to strip that protection
away and make it legal to drive wildlife toward
extinction in the national forests. We don’t think
that’s right and we don’t think that’s what the
majority of Americans support and we’re going to
seek to overturn it in the federal courts.”


Without public notice or public comment, the Bush
administration set aside the rule in favor of a less
restrictive guideline that relies on what’s called
“best available science.” One Forest Service official
says it doesn’t change things that much.


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

Related Links

Presidential Profile: George W. Bush

  • Many groups, including environmentalists and industry lobbyists, are scrutinizing the presidential candidates' opinions on environmental policy. (Photo courtesy of georgewbush.com)

The presidential candidates haven’t spent a lot of time talking about conservation or the environment. On the campaign trail, nature has taken a backseat to the economy and security. In the first of four reports on the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at the environmental record of President George W. Bush:

Transcript

The presidential candidates haven’t spent a lot of time talking about conservation or the
environment. On the campaign trail, nature has taken a backseat to the economy and security. In
the first of four reports on the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at the environmental record of President George W. Bush:


President Bush doesn’t often use the words “environment” or “environmental.” He prefers
“conservation.” It’s part of his philosophy. He believes we should manage resources and believes
the government has tipped the scales too far in favor of preservationists at the expense of business and agriculture. On his Texas ranch, Mr. Bush likes to exercise by cutting brush to manage nature. It’s could be a metaphor for how he sees the larger issue. It seemed that way when he talked about his approach to the environment during the second debate.


“I guess you’d say I’m a good steward of the land. The quality of the air’s cleaner since I’ve been the President. Fewer water complaints since I’ve been the President. More land being restored since I’ve been the President.”


While President Bush believes he’s striking the right balance between conserving natural
resources and not regulating business excessively, many environmentalists think the Bush
Administration’s approach to environmental issues is way out of whack.


Betsey Loyless is the Vice President of Policy for the League of Conservation Voters. The LCV
keeps track of votes and issues and grades politicians on their decisions.


“League of Conservation Voters gave George Bush an “F,” the first “F” we’ve ever given out in
modern history to a president because his policies of anti-environmentalism spread across the
board of dirty air, dirty water, degrading our public lands and jeopardizing our energy future by
focusing on 19th century energy policies that don’t meet our 21st century needs.”


President Bush largely ignores criticism from environmental groups. He sees them as extremists.
On the campaign trail, he frames the debate about the environment in terms of finding a better
balance between the protecting the environment and keeping jobs.


“If we want to keep jobs here in America and expand the job base, America must be the best place
in the world to do business. That means less regulations on our business owners.”


You would think that would make business and industry-types happy. But even there, the
President has his critics. The free-market supporters are disappointed in George Bush. They feel
he should have stuck to the ideas he had when he was running for president four years ago: Roll
back regulations that some businesses say cost a lot of money with little benefit to the
environment. The Property and Environment Research Center – self-described as the center for
free market environmentalism – gave the President a “C-minus” grade on his mid-term report card
because the free-market thinkers believe the Bush Administration compromised its original
proposals to please environmentalists and ended up pleasing no one.


Even some in President’s own party are unhappy with the Bush administration’s dealings with the
environment. The group, Republicans for Environmental Protection, backed by former Republican
EPA Administrators and other prominent Republicans say the President got it wrong. Jim DiPeso
is the group’s Policy Director. His group believes the Bush administration could have done more to
protect the environment.


“Well, our board took a look at the issue and decided that President Bush had not earned our
support based on his record over the last four years. So, because we have a policy of not
endorsing Democrats, the only alternative that we had in order to express our disappointment was
simply to withhold an endorsement for the presidential race this year.”


But the majority of Republicans say the President is making progress on environmental issues.
Lynn Scarlett is one of the architects of the Bush environmental policy. She is Assistant Secretary
of the Department of Interior’s Office of Policy Management and Budget.


“This administration has the highest dollars ever expended by any administration going towards
environmental protection whether it’s on the pollution side and pollution clean up or on the land
management and conservation side. We have a number of new programs the President initiated.
So, there is an awful lot that is occurring that is getting results on the ground.”


President Bush believes the government should be partners with private landowners and
industry… encouraging them to be more environmentally friendly instead of relying on regulations
to mandate less pollution and better stewardship of the land. Environmentalists say that leaves too much to chance and the potential cost to the planet is too dear.


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

Related Links

Vice Presidential Profile: Dick Cheney

  • Opinions vary on Cheney's environmental policy. Some say he's done well, some say he hasn't done enough. (Photo courtesy of georgewbush.com)

The political campaigns have been preoccupied with war, jobs, and health care. There’s been little mention of another issue that some Americans also find very important: the environment. As part of a series of profiles on the presidential and vice presidential candidates’ records on the environment, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at Vice President Dick Cheney:

Transcript

The political campaigns have been preoccupied with war, jobs, and health care. There’s been
little mention of another issue that some Americans also find very important: the environment.
As part of a series of profiles on the presidential and vice presidential candidates’ records
on the environment, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at Vice President
Dick Cheney:


This fall, during a campaign stop, Vice President Cheney was asked about his concerns and
philosophy on the preservation, conservation, and sustainability of water and natural resources.
The Vice President told his audience that he shared their concerns about the environment.


“Anybody who spends any time on waters, fishing, as I do – steelhead in northern British Columbia
when I get a chance and for trout in Wyoming and various places – it’s a fantastic resource. And
we really have an obligation to try to improve it and pass it on to the next generation in better
shape than we found it. I think we’re doing, as a general proposition, we’re doing pretty well.
Better than we used to.”


But most environmental groups are concerned Vice President Cheney is leading the effort to roll
back many environmental protections. Group after group is critical of the Vice President’s
actions.


“Cheney’s role has really been to be the front guy to fight for the industry’s agenda.”


Greg Wetstone directs the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Action Fund. Wetstone says Cheney
has become an easy target for criticism by the environmental movement. Wetstone says it’s clear
that Dick Cheney has wielded more power than most vice presidents have in the past.


“Well, the Vice President has clearly played a huge role in shaping this administration’s
policies on the environment and especially energy policy. It was Vice President Cheney who
led the Energy Task Force that met secretly with top industry lobbyists and shaped the policies
that were proposed by this administration while shutting out the advocates for a cleaner
environment. The polluters basically all but held the pen in crafting this administration’s
energy policy.”


The Natural Resources Defense Council sued the Bush White House, calling for the release of
documents related to the secret meetings. The courts ordered some documents to be released.
And the environmentalists say those papers confirmed the role of gas and oil industry lobbyists
in drafting the Bush energy policy.


Chris Horner says he took part in some of those meetings. Horner is a Senior Fellow at the
free-market think tank, the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He says the Vice President
worked hard to include environmentally friendly approaches when drafting the policy for energy.


“He pushed heavily in his energy plan for windmills, solar panel, transition to gas even more.
He didn’t just consult with free-market groups like ours. The reportage notwithstanding, I went
in several times to meet with these people and I passed very hard left-leaning groups on the way,
in the waiting room on the way out. The administration met with greens. They met with
free-marketers. They met with everyone.”


But the environmental groups argue the gas and oil industry had too much influence on the plan
that is supposed to regulate them.


The League of Conservation Voters has given the Bush administration failing marks for its
handling of environmental issues. Betsey Loyless is the group’s vice president of policy. She
says the energy task force is a good example of how Vice President Cheney contributed to what
her group sees as failure.


“We have an energy bill that wants to open sensitive public lands to drilling. That’s part of
the Cheney philosophy. We have a secret energy task force that wants to subsidize, at the
taxpayers’ expense, the coal, oil, and gas industry. That’s at Cheney’s behest. I mean,
Cheney has been the real leader.”


Vice President Cheney’s defenders say he’s only being realistic and practical. They say the
nation’s energy security should not be put at risk because of a few environmental extremists.
While Cheney is villified by the environmentalists, it doesn’t appear that all voters view him
in quite the same terms.


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

Related Links