Front view of a semi-truck (Photo courtesy of the Federal Highway Administration)
With diesel prices above four dollars a
gallon, truck drivers are looking for ways to reduce
fuel consumption. Lester Graham reports some new
technology might help:
Transcript
With diesel prices above four dollars a
gallon, truck drivers are looking for ways to reduce
fuel consumption. Lester Graham reports some new
technology might help:
Manufacturers have been making trucks more aerodynamic. But, the trailers they haul
are not. In Holland they’ve found a way to reduce the drag caused by turbulence under
and around the trailers.
At the Delft University of Technology, researcher Michel van Tooren says properly
designed side-skirts – those are panels down low on truck trailers – make them more
aerodynamic.
“Of course side-skirts are not something new in the transport world. They are available.
Even McDonald’s has used for a while, trucks with side-skirts. The thing is that this
specific device has an aerodynamic trick on the front that makes it much more efficient.
Yeah, it really seems to work.”
Van Tooren says it cuts fuel use by an average of 7.5%, but some drivers have reported
a 15% savings in fuel.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Map of the Great Lakes, the basin, and the 8 connecting states. (Photo courtesy of Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, NOAA)
The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Compact is an
agreement to stop shipping water out of the Great Lakes
basin. But all eight Great Lakes states and Congress
must approve it first. Lester Graham talked with Peter
Annin, the author of the book “The Great Lakes Water
Wars.” Annin says some of the states have been reluctant
to approve the treaty because Michigan has an image of saying
‘no’ to water requests from other states while putting
almost no water restrictions on its own towns and businesses:
Transcript
The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Compact is an
agreement to stop shipping water out of the Great Lakes
basin. But all eight Great Lakes states and Congress
must approve it first. Lester Graham talked with Peter
Annin, the author of the book “The Great Lakes Water
Wars.” Annin says some of the states have been reluctant
to approve the treaty because Michigan has an image of saying
‘no’ to water requests from other states while putting
almost no water restrictions on its own towns and businesses:
Peter Annin: “Michigan has been a laggard in monitoring and regulating its own domestic water
use. And so it’s seen by some other states as being somewhat hypocritical in the water debate.
For example, Minnesota, which is the most progressive domestically, if you’re going to withdraw
water from the Great Lakes at 10,000 gallons a day or more, you have to get a permit. In the state
of Michigan you can go up to 5 million gallons of water withdrawn from Lake Michigan per day
before you have to get a permit. 10,000 gallons in Minnesota, 5 million gallons in Michigan, and
this is what is causing tension between Michigan and some of the other Great Lakes states.”
Lester Graham: “Lets assume that all 8 Great Lakes states do pass this within the next year or
two, Congress then has to pass it – and many of the members of Congress are in those thirsty
Southwestern states. What happens then?”
Annin: “Yeah, that’s a really good point. We have to remember that the compact is just a piece of
paper until it passes all 8 Great Lakes legislatures and then is adopted by Congress. And there
are a lot of concerns among the general public, given that we have these dry-land states that have
a lot of problems with water perhaps opposing the Great Lakes compact. I’m not so certain that
that’s going to be an issue, because those states also have a lot federal water projects that come
up for renewal all the time that require the Great Lakes Congressmen to sign off on. And I’m not
sure they’re in a position, given how precious and important water is for them to survive on a daily
basis down there, that they’re really that interested in getting into a water fight with the Senators
and Congressmen in the Great Lakes basin. But, we’ll see.”
Graham: “I’ve looked at different models for getting Great Lakes water down to the Southwest,
and economically, they just don’t seem feasible. It would be incredibly expensive to try to get
Great Lakes water to the Southwest states, yet, State Legislators say again and again ‘oh no,
they have a plan, they know how it will happen.’ And as water becomes more valuable, they could
make it happen. How likely is it that there would be a canal or pipe and pumping stations built to
divert Great Lakes water, if this compact doesn’t pass?”
Annin: “It looks highly unlikely today, for the reasons that you just mentioned. It takes an
extraordinary amount of money to send water uphill, which is what would be to the West, and we’d
certainly have to cross mountain ranges if you’re even going to send it a shorter distance, to the
Southeast. To the point where it would be cheaper for many of these places to, even though it’s
expensive, to desalinate water from the ocean and then send it to inland places. But, you know, a
lot of water experts in the United States say ‘never say never’, because the value of fresh, potable
water is probably going to skyrocket in this century. We’re leaving the century of oil; we’re entering
the century of water. But, for right now, you’re absolutely right, it is extraordinary cost-prohibitive.
But let me say one other footnote here, it’s hard to find a federal water project in this country that
actually made economic sense.”
Inside the Reverse Osmosis building for the Groundwater Replenishment System in Orange County, California. (Photo courtesy of Orange County Water District)
The Groundwater Replenishment System in Orange County, California. (Photo courtesy of Orange County Water District)
Water from the Groundwater Replenishment System fills a basin. An inlet pipe can be seen underwater. (Photo courtesy of Orange County Water District)
Treated sewage water has been used to water
lawns and flush toilets before. But now the world’s
largest “toilet-to-tap” system has gone online. Mark
Brush reports on the new water treatment system:
Transcript
Treated sewage water has been used to water
lawns and flush toilets before. But now the world’s
largest “toilet-to-tap” system has gone online. Mark
Brush reports on the new water treatment system:
You think flush the toilet and it’s gone, right?
Well… that’s not happening in the O.C.
In Orange County California, the water people flush from their homes and businesses will
eventually come back to their taps.
The treated sewage water is sent to a water purification plant. It’s treated some more and
then pumped back into the aquifers where the county gets its water supply.
Mike Wehner is with the Orange County Water District. He says, at first, people kind of
held their nose at the idea:
“The biggest concern is kind of a general yuck-factor. It’s just, ‘You mean sewage? We’re
not going to drink that.’ But after people develop an understanding of the kind of
treatment processes we’re talking about, the yuck-factor diminishes, it goes away.”
Wehner says when the half billion dollar system is at its peak; it will add 70 million
gallons of recycled water a day to the areas drinking water supply.
There’s a new federal program aimed at encouraging more water conservation at your
bathoom faucet. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
There’s a new federal program aimed at encouraging more water conservation at your
bathoom faucet. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The US Environmental Protection Agency has issued specifications for bathroom faucet
manufacturers to qualify for the agency’s WaterSense label. The EPA wants about a 30
percent reduction in water flow from conventional models.
Kohler corporation engineer Rob Zimmerman says the smaller size of the flow restrictor
inside the faucet’s aerator will be the key to hitting the new target. He acknowledges some
water utilities wanted the new flow limit to be one gallon per minute, instead of the 1.5
per gallon limit specified by the EPA:
“The WaterSense program is flexible enough that as technology improves, they can change the
specification, but at this point the 1.5 was what everyone agreed to.”
The EPA says consumers will also save energy by heating and treating less water.
A very unscientific blind taste test found most people prefer grocery store syrup rather than real maple syrup. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Tom Jameson uses a brace and bit to drill a small hole in a red maple to tap sap for syrup. (Photo by Lester Graham)
A covered bucket is not used as often these days. Instead a network of tubing carries tree sap to a central collector. (Photo by Lester Graham)
It takes as much as 40 gallons of tree sap from soft maples to make one gallon of maple syrup. (Photo by Lester Graham)
In some parts of the country, it’s time to tap maple trees to make
syrup. Lester Graham went out to see how it’s done and conducted a
little taste test to see whether real maple syrup stands up to the name
brands you find at the grocery store:
Transcript
In some parts of the country, it’s time to tap maple trees to make
syrup. Lester Graham went out to see how it’s done and conducted a
little taste test to see whether real maple syrup stands up to the name
brands you find at the grocery store:
This story started out to be just a little walk in the woods to see
what all the fuss was about. Tapping sap from maples seems like a
quaint old-fashioned idea. After all, doesn’t syrup come from the
grocery store?
Well, anyway, Tom Jameson straightened me out about that. Early in the morning
he led the way through the woods until he found one of the maples he
wanted to tap. First, he drilled a small hole, then drove the tap – or
spline – into the tree:
“We are using an old bit and brace to drill a hole about a half in diameter and an inch and a half to two inches deep. Okay, now I need to just clean that whole little bit. I’ll be ready to drive in the tap, using a hammer to tap it into place. And, already the sap is beginning to run out.”
And that’s it. Sap started dripping right away into a covered bucket
hanging from the tap, or spline.
(Sound of dripping)
It takes a long time to get enough sap, and you need a lot of sap:
“Well, especially with these red maples, you’d need at least 40 gallons
to make one gallon of syrup.”
“So, if you’re doing it commercially, absolutely you want to stick to
sugar maples or hard maples. For the backyard guy that wants to try it,
any maple will work.”
You just have to boil it down sap from soft maples like the red maple
for a lot longer because there’s more water in the sap. And boiling down 40
gallons down to get one gallon of syrup takes a long time, like a good part of a
day or longer.
Jameson says for a lot of people, this is a family event. Empty the
buckets of sap into a big pan over an open fire and keep it boiling. And
a lot of the time you sit around listening to a favorite uncle tell
stories between nips of a flask that keeps getting passed around.
Jameson says it’s a good time, and worth the time spent because real
maple syrup is so good. Well, at least some people think it’s really
good. Jameson admits it’s not what some folks expect:
“Young people that have been raised on the grocery product sometimes
they don’t even like the real thing because it just tastes different to
them. It doesn’t have the extra butter in it or whatever it is. It’s
an acquired taste.”
With that in mind, we decided to do a little taste test. I got some
waffles, some real maple syrup, then three name brand grocery store
syrups… and just to throw everyone a curve, some dark corn syrup.
Then, we got five volunteers at the Environment Report headquaters.
Now, I’ll let you in on a little secret, the real maple syrup was
sample number three.
(Taster 1:)”Three is disgusting. I wouldn’t feed it to anyone. Awww,
gawd!”
(Taster 2:) “Three and four both have sort of a smoky flavor to them
which makes me think maybe it was boiled over a wood fire.”
(Taster 3:) “I think one, I think one is definitely store-bought, but
it’s really good. If two is the maple syrup, I’m really disappointed
because it’s awful. I hate it.”
(Taster 4:) “I chose three as the real one.”
(Taster 1:) “Three? If three is the real one, oh, my goodness.”
(Taster 4:) “I know. But, we’re so used to the imitation. And that’s
maybe why we don’t like it, because it is so real in flavor.”
(Taster 1:) “I’m hoping that two is the real one.”
Number two… was the corn syrup. Four of the five volunteers did guess
that number three was the real maple syrup, but none of them liked it
much.
Tom Jameson says a lot of people wouldn’t have anything but real maple
syrup. And a lot of people really enjoy going out to see
demonstrations of tapping trees for the sap and to watch the sap boil
and boil for hours and hours:
“Well, I think it’s a tie back to the good old days. And when people
can kind of make a connection to back to the way things used to be,
there’s something comforting about that.”
So, every year a lot of folks head out into the woods, hauling buckets
and drills and splines, and take advantage of what they think is one of
nature’s sweetest gifts.
This billboard was displayed along several major highways in Michigan. The sponsors were hoping to raise awareness about water diversion, but do these arid states really pose a threat to the Great Lakes? (Photo courtesy of Central Michigan Life )
One of the biggest claims about diversion of Great Lakes water is that the southwest will eventually come after it. (Photo by Kym Parry)
We’re continuing our series on the Great Lakes. One of the Ten Threats to the Great Lakes that experts identified was water withdrawals. Our guide in this series, Lester Graham, says the next report looks at one of the myths of water withdrawals:
Transcript
We’re continuing our series on the Great Lakes. One of the Ten Threats
to the Great Lakes that experts identified was water withdrawals. Our
guide in this series, Lester Graham, says the next report looks at one of
the myths of water withdrawals.
Environmentalists and policy makers say a thirsty world could pose a
major threat to the Great Lakes. Water wars have been predicted in arid
parts of the globe, and some say the laws of supply and demand might
one-day lead to a raid on the region’s fresh water. Reporter Mark Brush takes a
closer look at one claim: that states in the southwest will one day come
after the Great Lakes water… and finds that it might just be H2O hype…
Taking water out of the Great Lakes is a hot button issue, and no one is
more aware of this than politicians looking for votes. In the 2004
campaign, President Bush used the issue to rally a crowd in Traverse
City, Michigan:
“My position is clear. We are never going to allow the diversion of
Great Lakes water.”
(Sound of applause)
The issue taps into people’s emotions. People get outraged when they think
of someone taking water out of the Lakes – especially when they’ve seen lake
levels dropping over the years, and the region’s political leaders have listened
to those concerns. The states and provinces that surround the world’s largest fresh
water system are working on a compact that will prevent water diversions.
But where is the threat to Great Lakes water coming from? We
conducted an informal poll on the streets of Ann Arbor, and we asked
people: “who wants water from the Great Lakes?” Six out of the ten
people we talked to pointed to the west:
(Sound of street)
“Las Vegas, the Southwest.”
“Probably the dry states in the West. Arizona, Nevada.”
“I think the west should keep their damn hands off our water.”
But do the arid states in the West really pose a threat to Great Lakes
water? It turns out – this same question was asked more than twenty
years ago.
In the 1980s, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers studied the possibility of
moving Lake Superior water to the Missouri River. It’s a distance of
about six hundred miles. Farmers in the High Plains states were hoping
to use this water to irrigate their crops.
Jonathan Bulkley is a professor of civil and environmental engineering at
the University of Michigan. Bulkley and his colleagues analyzed this
diversion plan, and he says the whole project would have been too
expensive:
“We found it would take seven 1000 megawatt power plants dedicated to
lifting the water, because water needs to be lifted to reach these distant
locations, and in addition there would have to be conveyance structures
built to transport the water, and our conclusion was the total cost would
far exceed the value of the water.”
In other words, Bulkley found that it would be cheaper for these states to
find other sources of water – or to find ways to conserve the water they
had left, and this was a diversion of only 600 miles. A diversion all the
way to the Southwest would mean piping the water almost twice that
distance.
“We are always looking for extra water – everyone in the Southwest is
looking for extra water.”
Bob Barrett is a spokesperson for the Central Arizona Project. It’s one of
the biggest water suppliers in the Southwest. The Project pulls water
from the Colorado River and delivers it to southern Arizona. Barrett
says he can’t imagine a situation where Great Lakes water is pumped for
more than a thousand miles to the Colorado River:
“Most people don’t realize it, but a gallon of water weighs about eight
pounds, and if you’re going to push that up and over the Rocky
Mountains you’re going to need a lot of power. (Laughs) So, it’s a good
idea, but I don’t see how anybody could pay for it.”
But some observers say even though it might not happen today – it could
happen in the future. They point to a fast-growing population and a fast-
dwindling fresh water supply in the southwest. They say that
combination could drive engineers and policy makers to devise a way to
get Great Lakes water.
But Barrett says for states like Arizona, California, and even Texas – it
would be cheaper for them to build desalinization plants… these plants
convert ocean water into drinking water:
“I mean why should Texas build for a canal and then have to maintain it
from the Great Lakes down to the state of Texas when they can go to the
Gulf Coast and build several desalinization plants, and then just pipe it
wherever they need it?”
So, a large-scale water diversion to the southwest seems unlikely.
Experts say water from the Great Lakes is much more likely to go to
cities and towns right on the edge of the basin, but as legislators move to
tighten restrictions on diversions – even these places will
have a hard time getting access to the water.
Owners of hybrids like this Honda Insight could save on their taxes. (Photo courtesy of the National Park Service)
President Bush has signed a new energy bill that will raise tax savings for buyers of hybrid vehicles. Supporters predict high credits will boost sales of hybrids, and those cars will save gas. But some experts doubt the move will curb demand for oil. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee
reports:
Transcript
President Bush has signed a new energy bill that will raise tax savings for buyers of hybrid vehicles. Supporters predict high credits will boost sales of hybrids, and those cars will save gas. But some experts doubt the move will curb demand for oil. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:
Starting next year, hybrid-buyers could get up to three thousand dollars in tax credits, depending on the hybrid model. Sounds like a sweet deal, but some environmental groups doubt the move will translate into national fuel savings.
That’s because hybrids make up less than one percent of the car market. Congress didn’t require the other ninety-nine percent of cars to improve their fuel savings. David Friedman directs vehicle research for the Union of Concerned Scientists.
“The only way we could have saved oil in this energy bill is if Congress had actually had raised fuel economy standards or set a real goal for saving, say, a million gallons of oil per day by 2015.”
Overall fuel savings might stall for another reason. The number of hybrid tax credits is limited to 60,000 per car maker. Toyota expects to sell more than 100,000 Prius hybrids this year alone.
Source: The Humanure Handbook. Jenkins Publishing, PO Box 607, Grove City, PA 16127
www.jenkinspublishing.com
Books can be powerful. Sometimes they can even change your life. As part of our ongoing series on individual choices that impact the environment— “Your Choice; Your Planet”—the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Curtis Gilbert brings us the story of one book that changed his mother’s life… a book that so profoundly affected her that she felt compelled to share its teachings with strangers. It wasn’t the Bible or the Koran… or “Chicken Soup for the Soul.” And the part of his mother’s life that it changed is one so exceedingly private that most people don’t even like to talk about it. He’ll explain:
Transcript
Books can be powerful. Sometimes they can even change your life. As part of our ongoing
series on individual choices that impact the environment — “Your Choice; Your Planet” —
the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Curtis Gilbert brings us the story of one book that
changed his mother’s life…a book that so profoundly affected her that she felt compelled
to share its teachings with strangers. It wasn’t the Bible or the Koran… or “Chicken Soup
for the Soul.” And the part of his mother’s life that it changed is one so exceedingly private
that most people don’t even like to talk about it. He’ll explain:
There’s a sound — something familiar to everyone who lives in a Western, industrialized
country — but it’s a sound you’ll almost never hear at my mother’s house.
(sound of toilet flushing)
Five years ago, my mom turned off the to water to her toilet. She put a house plant on top
of the seat and opposite it built a five-gallon bucket in a box that took over all the duties
of its porcelain counterpart.
“Well I had seen ‘The Humanure Handbook’ in the FEDCO Seed catalog — and it just sort of
intrigued me. And I decided one year that I would read it since I was curious about it year after
year. And I read it and then I began to feel really bad every time I flushed the toilet.”
That’s because every time my mom flushed the toilet she was rendering undrinkable several
gallons of otherwise perfectly good water. And what’s more, she was whisking away valuable
nutrients that she could have just as easily returned to the earth.
That’s right… Humanure is a contraction consisting of two words: human and manure.
Here’s how it works: You use the humanure bucket in pretty much the same way you’d use a flush
toilet. Everything’s the same, except that instead of flushing when you’re done, there’s another
bucket right beside the humanure bucket and it’s filled with sawdust. You use a little cup to
scoop up some sawdust and then you just dump the sawdust in the humanure bucket when you’re
finished using it. That’s it. And the crazy thing, the thing that always surprises people when
I tell them about my mother’s humanure project is that it doesn’t smell bad.
“Anytime anything’s stinky in the humanure, you just cover it with sawdust and it doesn’t stink
anymore, except of course what is already in the air, which is like any toilet.”
Once a day my mom takes the bucket brimming with sawdust and humanure and dumps it into her
massive compost pile. There, it mingles with her kitchen scraps, weeds from the garden, and
just about every other bit of organic matter she can find… and in two years time the humanure
cooks down into dark, rich, fertile soil.
For the first couple of years, my mom was content just to operate her own humanure compost
heap and let her garden reap the benefits — but the more she did it the more of a true believer
she became. Strict adherence to the faith wasn’t enough for her anymore. She had to become a
missionary. She bought a case of Humanure Handbooks and set up a booth at an organic gardening
festival called Wild Gathering.
“And I think I sold one at that Wild Gathering. And then after that I was giving them away right
and left to my sisters and nieces and friends and whoever! And I used them all up and then this
last year I decided that not only was I going to get another box of Humanure Handbooks, I was
going to collect humanure at Wild Gathering!”
My mom knew she’d a lot of buckets for the project, so went door to door at the businesses
in town. She didn’t say what she needed them for, and luckily they didn’t ask. She collected eight
buckets full in all — not quite the payload she was hoping for. Attendance at Wild Gathering was
pretty low that year, due to rain, but relatively speaking, sales of the Humanure Handbook were
way up.
“I sold more at this last Wild Gathering. I think I sold five or six. And I gave one away for
Christmas this year to Natasha, who had been having plumbing problems. And I started my spiel and
she was really quite interested. And, I think we may have a convert there before long.”
Conversion. The ultimate goal of any evangelist. My mom admits that she doesn’t know of anyone
she’s actually brought into the fold — but she likes to think she’s planting seeds. Just
introducing people to the idea that there’s a alternative to flush toilets, she says, is a huge
step forward.
“This is really a shocking idea to a lot of people and a lot of people who come to the house will
not use it. I have to make the water toilet available to them.”
My grandmother won’t use it. Neither will my mom’s friend, Rochelle. And then there’s my
girlfriend, Kelsey. Last summer the two of us spent several days at my mom’s house in Maine
before taking a road trip back to where we live in Minnesota. After quietly weighing the
ramifications of sawdust versus water toilets, Kelsey finally decided to brave the humanure…
well, sort of.
Curtis: “So you used it for some things, but you’ve told me before that there were some things
that you couldn’t bring yourself to do.”
(laughing)
Kelsey: “No, I couldn’t. I did not have a bowel movement during our entire visit to your
house, over the course of four days.”
I’d like to think that Kelsey’s physical inability to make full use of the sawdust toilet
was an anomaly, that most people would have no problem going to the bathroom at my mom’s house
in Maine… But I doubt that’s the case. And that’s not the only reason I’m a little skeptical about
my mom’s vision of a world humanure revolution.
Curtis: “It occurs to me, and I’m about 100 pages into the book at this point, that this is
all well and good for people living in rural areas, but I live in a city. Where am I going to
put a compost heap?”
Mom: “You know, there could be chutes in buildings. There would have to be temporary storage.
Trucks would come in and take it out. Great huge compost piles would be built and it would work
down very… I think that where there’s a will, there’s a way.”
I’ll admit it; I’m still skeptical. I mean I believe in humanure, sure. But I also haven’t
put a house plant on top of the toilet in my big city apartment…and I probably never will.
Call me a summer soldier in the humanure revolution if you will, but when I go home to my
Mom’s next Christmas, I’ll be flushing with sawdust and I’ll be proud.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Curtis Gilbert.
Front view of a semi-truck (Photo courtesy of the Federal Highway Administration)
