Will Coal Ash Spill Get Into the Air?

  • Airborne toxins could be causing health problems for residents near this coal ash spill (seen in the background) in Tennessee. (Photo by Matt Shafer Powell)

Environmentalists don’t want a lot of new coal-burning power plants to be built. They’re concerned about more greenhouse gases from the plants and environmental damage from mining the coal. Late last year, another concern came to light. For decades a power plant disposed of coal ash in a pond next to it. The dam holding back the coal ash sludge failed. Matt Shafer Powell reports more than a billion gallons of the sludge caused plenty of damage to the soil and water. Now, there’s concern about the air:

Transcript

Environmentalists don’t want a lot of new coal-burning power plants to be built. They’re concerned about more greenhouse gases from the plants and environmental damage from mining the coal. Late last year, another concern came to light. For decades a power plant disposed of coal ash in a pond next to it. The dam holding back the coal ash sludge failed. Matt Shafer Powell reports more than a billion gallons of the sludge caused plenty of damage to the soil and water. Now, there’s concern about the air:

In December, the massive coal ash spill at a Tennessee Valley Authority power plant in East Tennessee made people aware of a hazard they’d never really considered before. And no one knows how much of a problem it’s going to be.

“We’re looking across the Emory River.”

Matt Landon is a volunteer for the environmental group United Mountain Defense. These days, he spends a lot of time near the Tennessee Valley Authority’s ash spill site. His double respirator mask, his personal video camera and his vocal criticism of the T.V.A. have all become fixtures here. It was on one of his recent rounds near the Emory River that he saw something that scared him.

“I drove around the bend here on Emory River Road and I witnessed a massive dust storm coming off the entire coal ash disaster site.”

Landon says the dust cloud was about 70-to-80 feet high and about a half mile wide. Coal ash can contain several toxic heavy metals — like arsenic, lead, and mercury. For Landon, the site of this swirling cloud was a sobering and frightening reminder that it wouldn’t take much for the toxic materials contained in the wet cement-like sludge to dry out and become airborne.

When Landon walks up to Diana Anderson’s house on the Emory River, her shih-tzus go nuts. And no wonder. Here’s this tall, lanky guy in a double-respirator mask headed their way.

Anderson has lived here for forty years now, just downwind from the plant. And she never worried about it. But since the spill, she’s begun to notice changes in her health.

“My sinuses are irritated, I have a raspy throat, and I do a lot of coughing and my head hurts and I feel very, very, very fatigued.”

Anderson has volunteered to let Matt Landon test the air near her home. So, the two head to her kitchen sink, where they wash and prepare Pyrex dishes.

They’ll set the dishes out on Anderson’s back porch to collect dust. After a while, Landon will send the dust samples off to a lab to find out what’s in the air.

The T.V.A. is also testing the air, with help from the state of Tennessee and the E.P.A. T.V.A. Spokesman Gil Francis says they’ve already collected more than 10-thousand air samples.

“We’re taking samples 24/7, the samples are coming back that the air quality is meeting the National Air Ambient Standards and we’re going to continue to work hard to make sure that’s what the case is going forward.”

That might be easier said than done. Francis says the T.V.A. has done a lot to keep the ash from drying out and blowing around. They’ve dropped straw and grass seed from helicopters and coated the ash in an acrylic mixture. But Steven Smith of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy says nobody really knows what it’s going to take to clean this mess up. Or how the people who live downwind will be affected.

“There are still a lot of unknowns about this. We’ve never had an ash spill this size and I think people ought to err on the side of caution.”

If there’s one bit of consolation for the people living near the Kingston coal ash spill, it’s this: the National Weather Service says that during the summer months this region is among the least windy and most humid in the country.

For the Environment Report, I’m Matt Shafer Powell.

Related Links

Choking on Construction Dust

  • Scientists say that inhaling those fine particles often found at construction sites is bad for the lungs and the heart (Photo courtesy of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction)

For most of us, the dust kicked
up by a construction site seems like a
minor nuisance. But it can be a health
hazard. As Karen Kelly reports, construction
dust is one source of air pollution that’s
largely been ignored:

Transcript

For most of us, the dust kicked
up by a construction site seems like a
minor nuisance. But it can be a health
hazard. As Karen Kelly reports, construction
dust is one source of air pollution that’s
largely been ignored:

If you’ve ever had the good fortune of living near a construction site, you
probably know a bit about dust.


Here in Ottawa, Canada, Mahad Adam can tell you all about it.

(construction sound)

For the past year, he’s lived across the street from a construction site that fills
an entire city block.

And he says the air quality can be terrible.

“Sneezing a lot, yes. Since the dust comes in during the whole day that they’ve
been working, it was constant dust inside the room so it was like having an
allergy.”

Trucks and bulldozers drive in and out of the site all day. They’re tracking mud
on the streets and the air is filled with dust.

Once that dirt is on the pavement, it’s kicked back up by every car that passes
by.

The construction site’s supervisor, Brad Smith, says he’s received lots of
complaints about the dust from nearby residents, especially seniors.

“I’m used to the dust and the dirt, whereas some of the people with breathing
problems and stuff that live in the community will be affected negatively more
than we are.”

In fact, too much dust can even be dangerous for people with respiratory
illnesses such as asthma.

To keep it under control, he says his company flushes the dirt off the streets
twice a week and then vacuums the rest up with a special truck.

He says the amount of cleaning they do depends on who they’re working for.

“My client is the city of Ottawa and they wrote that into the contract during
tender time. Whereas other projects I’ve been on, it can get into a bit of an
argument because it costs us and we push back a little bit.”

Smith says his company could get a fine if they leave debris on the roads.

But it’s hard to find a specific law – whether here in Canada or in the U.S. –
either at the national level, the state level, or even the local level that deals
directly with the dust coming off of construction sites.

The officials I talked to said that’s because it’s a temporary nuisance.

But what got me thinking about it was the research from Professor Brian
McCarry at McMaster University in Ontario.

He drove around his city measuring air pollution at different sites and he found
the cloud of dust kicked up when you pass a construction site is not something
you want to be breathing.

“In some cases you’re kicking up so much dust that the fine particles –
the things that cause health effects – are at levels that are there for concern.”

Scientists say that inhaling those fine particles is bad for the lungs and the
heart.

But McCarry says keeping the air clean around a construction site is actually
not that hard.

“It’s just housekeeping, it’s nothing more complex than that, and if you tell
them the housekeeping is higher in this area than elsewhere, they’ll do it.”

That can mean spraying down dusty roads with water or a sticky pine
substance.

Or using the vacuum truck more frequently in areas where there’s construction.

When companies started doing that, McCarry says there was a big drop in the
air pollution at those sites.

Now, local laws require that cleanup.

McCarry argues those laws should be everywhere.

For The Environment Report, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

Lead Paint Rules, Too Little Too Late?

  • The lead paint on the inside of this apartment window is decades old. Toddlers who swallow lead paint chips risk behavioral disorders, lowered intelligence, and neurological damage. The dust created by opening and closing the window is also toxic. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

Some environmental issues are so old, they almost seem dead. One of those issues is lead paint. It got a lot of press in the 1970’s, but even today there are nearly 300,000 kids with high lead levels. Now the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to protect children when older homes get a facelift. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee has this look:

Transcript

Some environmental issues are so old, they almost seem dead. One of those issues is lead
paint. It got a lot of press in the 1970’s, but even today there are nearly 300,000 kids with
high lead levels. Now the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to protect
children when older homes get a facelift. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn
Allee has this look:


The 1970’s were filled with horror stories of toddlers eating lead paint chips. It was
pretty serious stuff. Children became mentally retarded or even died from it.
You don’t read those stories much anymore.


(sound of kids playing)


But for Chicago lead inspector Earl Coleman, lead paint’s still a daily reality. Today he’s
at this house because a child here tested high for lead. It’s a high priority inspection –
there are eleven children living here… and that’s not all.


“This particular stop’s also a daycare, so we get extra benefits from the fact that it’s not
just a child in the house. All those that come here and get service will benefit from this
inspection.”


Coleman sets up his lead detector.


(beep)


And starts in a children’s room. It’s decorated with Disney knickknacks and pink paint.
As he checks the walls, he explains lead chips aren’t the only danger.


“What happens is, with lead, once it begins to deteriorate, it creates dust, and from that
moment on dust then is spread very easily.”


This invisible dust gets on furniture, clothes and toys, and to a kid, any of these is
fair game for chewing. Coleman eyes the window nearby.


If it’s got lead paint, opening or closing it could spread toxic dust. Two grade-school
girls comb their dolls’ hair while sitting just below the window. Coleman leans over
them to get a reading.


“If a child’s been cooped up in the house all day long and they want to know what’s
going on outside, the best place to look is through the window, so you touch the window,
you sit in the window, and yes, we have lead here.”


A minute ago, this was just a play area, but with this simple check, the girls now are
playing under an official lead hazard. Ingesting dust could be as easy as forgetting to
wash their hands before lunch. The other windows test positive, too.


Luckily, the homeowner qualifies for a free program to replace the windows, but
programs like that don’t reach everybody. That’s why the EPA wants home contractors to
get training before they repair older homes.


Coleman supports the idea. He says, if just opening a window creates a threat, think of
what sanding one can do.


One time, he was called to a building that had just been totally rehabbed.


“It was ready for show. Anybody that would walk through the place would say this place
is beautiful, but he had so much dust still there, that there was fine, fine film in that
place, and the kid got sick because there was still lead dust, all over everything.”


He says the contractor had a great reputation, but just didn’t know any better. Coleman
says that’s pretty common, but some rehab industry reps say the rules aren’t needed.


Vince Butler’s with the National Association of Home Builders. The group also
represents home rehabbers. Butler worries contractors will have trouble paying for
mandatory training. He says those training costs will be passed on to consumers, and
that’ll mean higher prices.


“The concern is that you get frustrated and decide, heck, I’ll just do it myself and do the
best I can. Or, you hire somebody that comes in there and, god forbid, starts sanding
things and burning things to get rid of that paint, and makes the problem much worse
than had a professional had come in and employed what we know to be safe work
practices.”


Butler says unprofessional repairs could leave even more lead dust around.


The EPA doubts that. It says homeowners will still hire professionals because repair
prices won’t rise much.


Meanwhile, advocates support the rules. Anita Weinberg heads a group called Lead-Safe
Illinois. She says children’s health shouldn’t be left to the rehab industry’s voluntary
training. When Weinberg tries making that point to politicians, she often gets frustrated.
Just like everyone else, politicians feel the problem’s ancient history.


“When we go and talk to legislators they often wind up saying, I thought the problem was
solved, and in fact, the problem is that lead doesn’t disappear.”


And Weinberg says even the EPA’s been slow to fight the problem. Congress asked for
these new rules for rehab contractors thirteen years ago.


The EPA will hear comments on the home repair rules over the next few months. In the
meantime, Weinberg and other advocates will push to keep the strongest provisions.
They’ll also ask the EPA to improve follow-up testing.


That way, homeowners can be sure no lead dust was left behind after a rehab.
Weinberg’s not sure whether to be heartened by the EPA’s proposal.


“It’s not depressing in that we really know what we should be doing about it and can
make those efforts. It is depressing that we’re not yet doing it sufficiently.”


That’s even after decades worth of research showing lead poisons children.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Study: Diet Worsens Air Pollution Effects

A lot of studies have linked air pollution with heart and lung problems. A new study suggests your diet can worsen air pollution’s effects on you. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland has more:

Transcript

A lot of studies have linked air pollution with heart and lung
problems. A new study suggests your diet can worsen air pollution’s
effects on you. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland
has more:


Every time you inhale, you’re breathing in tiny particles from dust, soot
and smoke. They can increase both the plaque buildup in your arteries,
and the risk of a heart attack or stroke.


Now, a study led by Dr. Lung Chi Chen at New York University’s
School of Medicine says a high fat diet combined with bad air led to a
faster buildup of plaque in the arteries of mice. He says that’s because
air pollution affects lipids – fats – in the blood. It changes their
characteristics, or oxidizes them, which leads to more plaque on artery
walls.


“If the mice are fed with high-fat, then the level of the oxidized
lipid will be higher, because they have more lipid in their blood.”


Dr. Chen says arteries of mice on a high-fat diet and breathing dirty air
were 42-percent blocked. Mice breathing clean air had arteries that were
26-percent blocked.


He hopes the study not only encourages people to eat better, but also
persuades the government to toughen air quality standards.


For the GLRC, I’m Michael Leland.

Related Links

Ten Threats: Coastal Development Pressures

  • Construction along the shorelines can put a strain on natural systems. (Photo by Carole Swinehart/Michigan Sea Grant Extension)

One of the more subtle but relentless threats to the Great Lakes is
coastal development. Condos, ever larger and nicer beach homes
and buildings and parking lots in the watershed all have an
impact on the Lakes. As the population grows and the suburban
lifestyle keeps spreading, the health of the lakes is compromised
in countless tiny ways. Reporter Peter Payette finds those tiny
ways all add up:

Transcript

We’re continuing our look at ‘Ten Threats to the Great Lakes.’
Lester Graham is our guide through the series. He says the
experts who were surveyed to determine the threats say rapid
development is among the problems affecting the lakes:


One of the more subtle but relentless threats to the Great Lakes is
coastal development. Condos, ever larger and nicer beach homes
and buildings and parking lots in the watershed all have an
impact on the Lakes. As the population grows and the suburban
lifestyle keeps spreading, the health of the lakes is compromised
in countless tiny ways. Reporter Peter Payette finds those tiny
ways all add up:


Greg Reisig is standing at the edge of a 20-acre construction site
just down the street from the shore Lake Michigan.


Below him is a man-made pond a few hundred feet long. It was a
dry summer around here, but the pond is full.


In fact, Reisig says the water level is always the same.


“And that indicates there’s a lot of ground water flowing
here…there’s a lot of water in this pond and you can see what
was a whole big wetland complex…there’s a lot of cedar and red
osier dogwood…all the wetland plants.”


There are no wetlands here now.


The site in northern Michigan was excavated for homes a few
years ago.


But now the Army Corps of Engineers says the wetlands that
were here need to be restored. A few acres likely will be
restored. But Reisig says almost the whole site was wetlands
once. He expects it will soon be a subdivision with not much
more than a drainage ditch connecting it to Lake Michigan.


“What will that do to the amount of flow of water going into the
bay? Because of hard road surfaces, hard driveways, roofs,
buildings and supposedly fertilized lawns. What will happen to
the water and how will that increase the flow to the bay?”


The developer’s attorney says this is nonsense. Matt Vermetten
says this land was heavily farmed and mined for clay.


“There are pockets of quote unquote wetland and those are there
because of excavation for clay. So is this a wetland complex of
the nature we speak of when we typically speak of such a thing? I
think not.”


Disputes like this are becoming more common around the Great
Lakes. John Nelson is the baykeeper with the Grand Traverse
Bay Watershed Center. The bay off Lake Michigan and attracts a
lot of people. But Nelson says development doesn’t have to be a
problem.


He says the problem is people don’t think about the ecology of
the lakes. For example, east of Traverse City, Michigan, resorts
dominate the coastline. Along the beach, thick stands of sedges
and rushes extend out a few hundred feet. But the sections of
dark green marsh alternate with stretches of clean sand and white
lawn chairs.


(birds calling on beach)


Nelson grew up here and says this part of the lake was never a
sugar sand beach.


“They’ve located in a coastal marsh. Instead of celebrating and
dealing with that they’ve chosen to see it as they would like to
have it and then change it.”


The impacts of the changes are cumulative. Fish and wildlife
habitat is fragmented. The natural filtering properties of the
wetlands are gone.


So every time the city gets a rain shower all the dust and grime
and pollution are washed right into the lake.


Census data show people are leaving many of the Great Lakes
coastal cities and spreading out along the coastline. But it’s not
clear how local governments should plan for the growth.


Mike Klepinger studies land use planning for the Michigan Sea
Grant program. He says it’s hard to make direct connections
between a healthy lake and particular land uses.


“We are getting more planning along the shoreline than we had
thirty years ago in the state. The number of counties and number
of townships that have a plan has gone up, for example. But we
don’t know whether those plans are really doing any good.”


And it’s hard to implement good planning on a broad basis. In
any area, dozens of different local governments might have
independent control over development.


Multiply that by the number cities, townships and counties along
the coasts of the Great Lakes… and it’s hard to see how it all can
be managed so that enough coastline habitat is preserved.


For the GLRC, I’m Peter Payette.

Related Links

Dow Chemical Exempted From Health Testing Costs

  • Much of the Tittabawassee River floodplain has been contaminated by dioxin from a Dow Chemical plant. (Photo courtesy of Michigan DOT)

A recent court ruling found that Dow Chemical Company does not have to pay to monitor the health of people living in a Michigan floodplain contaminated with dioxin. The dioxin is a by-product of the manufacturing process for chemicals made by Dow. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton reports:

Transcript

A recent court ruling found that Dow Chemical Company does not have
to pay to monitor the health of people living in a Michigan floodplain
contaminated with dioxin. The dioxin is a byproduct of the
manufacturing process for chemicals made by Dow. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Tracy Samilton
reports:


Dioxin is implicated in liver problems and cancer. At least twenty-two miles of
the Tittabawassee River floodplain in central Michigan are contaminated
with dioxin from a Dow Chemical plant.


Homeowners said Dow should pay for
ongoing tests to monitor the amount of dioxin in their blood. Now that
the court has ruled against them, floodplain resident Kathy Henry says the
only thing people can do is try to keep more dioxin from getting into their
systems.


“I wear a dust mask when I mow, we don’t eat any of
neighbors’ produce that they offer us that’s grown in the floodplain, and after we mow the lawn or we’re working out in gardens or yard, we come in and throw our clothes in the
laundry right away and jump in the shower to wash it off of us.”


Dow Chemical has commissioned a one-time study to compare dioxin levels in
people who live in the floodplain with levels found among people in another
region.


For the GLRC, I’m Tracy Samilton.

Related Links

STUDY FINDS PDBEs IN HOUSEHOLD DUST

  • Babies and children are frequently in contact with dust. Some scientists worry that potentially-harmful chemicals found in household dust will result in negative health effects. (Photo by Jason Sellers)

Chemicals that are suspected of being hazardous to human health are being found in household dust. The chemicals are flame retardants used in everything from carpet padding to TV sets. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

Chemicals that are suspected of being hazardous to human health
are being found in household dust. The chemicals are flame retardants
used in everything from carpet padding to TV sets. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:


The chemicals are known as poly-brominated-diphenyl-ethers, or PBDEs.
Scientists already knew that these flame retardant chemicals where found in
food. Now researchers are finding the chemicals, in household dust.


Heather Stapleton is a research chemist at the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. She authored a study recently published by the
American Chemical Society.


“I went out and collected some house dust samples from areas within the
Washington D.C. metropolitan area, and brought these samples back to the lab
and just did a preliminary measurement looking at PBDE’s in the house dust
samples and found surprisingly high levels in the house dust.”


Researchers are most concerned about how the chemicals affect developing
babies. Babies have more contact with household dust than the rest of us.
The chemicals have been found to cause developmental and nervous system
damage in rats and mice.


For the GLRC, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Fire Retardant Chemicals Ring Alarm Bells

  • Meredith Buhalis and her daughter Zoe. Meredith's breast milk was tested for PBDEs as part of a study by the Environmental Working Group. (Photo by Meredith Buhalis)

Flame retardant chemicals help make our lives safer.
The chemicals are designed to keep plastics and foam from
catching on fire, but the flame retardants are worrying some
scientists because these chemicals are turning up in people’s
bodies, sometimes at alarmingly high rates. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

Flame retardant chemicals help make our lives safer. The chemicals are designed
to keep plastics and foam from catching on fire. But the flame retardants are
beginning to worry some scientists because these chemicals are turning up in
peoples’ bodies. Sometimes at alarmingly high rates. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:


If you take a look around your house, you can find a lot of things that have
flame retardant chemicals in them. They’re in your television set, the cushions
in your couch, and the padding underneath your carpet. They’re known as poly-bromiated-diphenyl
ethers, or PBDEs. And they’re either mixed in or sprayed on plastics and foam to keep a fire
from spreading.


Five years ago a Swedish study found these chemicals were accumulating in women’s breast
milk. Studies in the U.S. followed, and researchers also found PBDEs in Americans, but at
even higher levels. In fact, Americans have some of the highest levels ever measured. And
over time, the levels have been going up.


(sound of baby)


Meredith Buhalis was one of those people measured in a study by an envrionmental organization
called the Environmental Working Group. Buhalis and 20 other first time moms sent in samples
of their breast milk. When the samples were tested, all of them had some level of PBDEs in
them. Buhalis says when she read the results she didn’t know what to think.


“I guess I kind of read the results and the study was like, ‘Oh, well that sort of sucks.’
I wish I knew more about what that meant. ‘Cause I don’t. You know, they don’t know what
that means.”


Scientists don’t know how or if the chemicals affect human health. And some scientists
think the government and the chemical companies aren’t doing enough to look into PBDEs.


(sound of typing)


In his office at the University of Texas in Dallas, Dr. Arnold Schecter is working on an
article about the flame retardants. He’s been studying toxic chemicals for more than thirty
years. He and some of his colleagues think PBDEs are a lot like another type of chemical…


“It reminds us of PCBs. PCBs structurally are similar to the PBDEs. So there is the worry,
or the concern, that they may have many, if not all, the toxic effect that PCBs have on humans.”


So far the data on PCBs strongly suggest that the chemicals can cause cancer in humans as
well as other human health effects such as damage to the nervous and immune systems. The
companies that manufacture the flame retardants say it’s not fair to compare PBDEs with
PCBs. They say the chemicals are vastly different.


But no one really knows whether the chemicals are similar in the way they affect human
health. That’s because no one’s studied the human health effects of PBDEs.


“Unfortunately, there are no published human health studies and I don’t believe any have
been funded by the federal government to date. Nor by industry, nor by any foundations,
which is a bit different than the situation with PCBs and dioxins years ago when many
studies were being funded.”


Some animal studies suggest that the chemicals can permanently disrupt the hormone and
nervous systems, cause reproductive and developmental damage, and cause cancer. All that
makes scientists such as Dr. Schecter especially concerned about the most vulnerable
population – developing babies.


Because of the concerns, the biggest manufacturer of these chemicals in the U.S. has agreed
to stop making two of the PBDE formulations that were found to accumulate in people. Great
Lakes Chemical says production will stop by the end of this year. The chemicals will be
replaced with another type of brominated flame retardant.


The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum is a trade group that represents companies
that make the flame retardants. Peter O’Toole is the group’s U.S. Director. He says so
far the amount of chemicals found in people doesn’t concern the companies, but the upward
trend does.


“And again, it wasn’t of alarming numbers, but the manufacturer was concerned that these
numbers were going up nonetheless. And they thought it was prudent, and they talked to the
EPA and EPA thought it was prudent if there was some sort of mutual phase out of those materials.”


Dr. Schecter says he commends the company for taking this step. But he says even though these
two formulations will be phased out, the flame retardants are already in our environment now.
He says his research has found high levels of PBDEs by wiping the plastic casing on television
sets, and in the dust found in homes. He says what’s in our homes now isn’t going to vanish,
so we need to figure out how the chemicals get into us, so we can avoid potential health problems.


For its part, the U.S. Envrionmental Protection Agency says large-scale human health studies
take a long time to develop. An agency spokesperson says the EPA first needs to learn how a
person becomes highly exposed. After that, they say researchers will be able to ask the question,
“for the highly exposed people, are there any health effects?”


(sound of baby)


That leaves people such as Meredith Buhalis, with a lot more questions than answers.


“We are thinking of having another baby, and I think I would really like to know more about
PBDEs. I think about it when I think about that.” (to her daughter) “Oh thank you. Hi, baby.
Hi, Zoe.”


The Federal government doesn’t plan to regulate the chemicals anytime soon. But some states
aren’t waiting for more studies. A handful of states have placed restrictions on certain
types of PBDEs. And in other states, legislation is pending.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

GREATER MENACE FROM PCBs?

Toxic waste sites contaminated with PCBs dot industrial areas of the Midwest. Scientists have long believed that the greatest PCB risk for humans comes from eating PCB contaminated fish. A new study challenges that assumption. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports: