The Bee Man of Brooklyn

  • John Howe keeps bees on the roof of his Brooklyn townhouse. (Photo by Samara Freemark)

Beekeeping is a growing hobby – there
are even a couple of hives on the White
House lawn. And beekeeping is even getting
popular in America’s largest, most urban
city – New York. The only problem is,
beekeeping is actually illegal in New York.
Samara Freemark went to find
out why some New Yorkers are doing it anyway:

Transcript

Beekeeping is a growing hobby – there
are even a couple of hives on the White
House lawn. And beekeeping is even getting
popular in America’s largest, most urban
city – New York. The only problem is,
beekeeping is actually illegal in New York.
Samara Freemark went to find
out why some New Yorkers are doing it anyway:

When I first got in touch with the Gotham City Honey Co-op and told them I wanted to do a story on beekeeping in New York, they were a little nervous about talking with me. They were worried about a New York City health code that makes urban beekeeping illegal. The city’s worried about people getting stung. The Honey Co-op didn’t want to blow anyone’s cover, but eventually they did hook me up with John Howe.

Howe keeps bees on the roof of his Brooklyn townhouse – which means every day – several times a day, actually – he climbs four flights of stairs and one shaky ladder to get up to his hives.

“I gotta go up the ladder. I’m getting tired of it.”

(sound of roof opening)

“Turned out to be a nice day.”

Howe keeps two hives. He says there could be up to 150,000 bees in them.

“You can see them all going in and out. Lot of bees, yeah.”

Honey bees can fly up to three miles from their hives, looking for flowers to pollinate. Howe’s bees probably buzz by thousands of his neighbors every day. I asked him if anyone ever complained about them or called authorities to turn him in for illegal beekeeping. Howe said his neighbors are actually pretty cool with the bees.

“I give them free honey, so that helps. People just raise their eyebrow or shrug and say, ‘that’s neat.’ They call me bee man. I walk down the street, they say, ‘hey bee man, you got any honey?’”

Across town, Roger Repahl raises honeybees in the garden of a church in the South Bronx. He started beekeeping ten years ago, when local gardeners noticed that their vegetables weren’t getting pollinated.

“The community gardeners were complaining that they were getting a lot of flowers but very little fruit. So Greenthumb – that’s the community gardening wing of the parks department – Greenthumb said that’s because you don’t have enough pollinators in the South Bronx.”

So Repahl trucked some hives down from Vermont, and he says the bees pretty much solved the neighborhood’s pollination problem.

Now, this is the kind of story that gets beekeepers like John Howe pretty steamed up about New York’s anti-beekeeping laws. Like a lot of cities, New York is doing just about everything it can to encourage community gardening. But to grow your own food, you need insects to pollinate your plants. John Howe says banning honeybees is like banning local food.

“The best reason for making bees legal is that they pollinate so many plants. The more bees that we can raise and keep, the more chance we have of having food.”

It’s not quite that clear cut. At least, that’s what James Danoff Burg says. He studies insects at Columbia University. He says there are native bugs that do plenty of pollinating. Beetles, for example, and other kinds of bees like honeybees. And those native species are being driven out by honey bees, which are originally from Europe.

“I think it’s a mixed bag. They have benefits to people, for certain. And from a human perspective, if all you’re concerned about is that your plants get pollinated and you can get the fruits that come from that, it’s a pure positive bag. The negative part of that mixed bag comes when you start to think about native biodiversity.”

But Danoff Burg says preserving native biodiversity maybe doesn’t matter so much in a place like New York. The city’s ecosystem has already been changed so much, and there are other, more wild places where native insects can thrive.

So even though NY is America’s biggest city, it might also be the best place in the country to raise bees. As long as you keep them out of sight of the law.

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

Related Links

Taking Back the ‘Take Back’ Law?

  • 19 states have passed ‘take back’ laws that require manufacturers to take back old electronics and pay to recycle them. But manufacturers are challenging these laws. (Photo source: dirkj at Wikimedia Commons)

The City of New York is being sued
by the electronics industry. Samara
Freemark reports it’s over recycling
electronic waste, such as cell phones
and computers:

Transcript

The city of New York is being sued by the electronics industry. Samara Freemark reports it’s over recycling electronic waste such as cell phones and computers:

Electronic waste contains all sorts of hazardous chemicals, but safely recycling it is expensive.

So 19 states have passed ‘take back’ laws that require manufacturers to take back old electronics and pay to recycle them.

Now manufacturers are challenging these laws. Two industry groups have sued New York City. They want the city’s take back law overturned.

Kate Sinding is a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council. That group has joined New York in the suit. She says a decision in the case could have consequences beyond electronics take backs.

“There are a lot of deeper questions that are raised by the lawsuit, including issues of corporate responsibility. If somebody’s going to produce something that has toxic components, what is their ongoing responsibility to deal with that, even after it’s sold into the market?”

The court will decide that next year.

For The Environment Report, I’m Samara Freemark.

Related Links

Sparring Over Water in the South

  • A federal judge ruled that if Florida, Georgia and Alabama don’t come to a water agreement by 2012, Atlanta has to stop taking drinking water from Lake Lanier. (Photo courtesy of the US EPA)

It’s called “the economic engine of
the South.” Atlanta, Georgia’s population
has exploded in the last two decades.
But with that growth has come environmental
problems, like where to get enough drinking
water. Georgia, Florida, and Alabama
have been fighting over who gets how
much water from rivers that flow through
the states. And, as Tanya Ott reports, a
decision in the federal lawsuit could effect
communities across the country:

Transcript

It’s called “the economic engine of
the South.” Atlanta, Georgia’s population
has exploded in the last two decades.
But with that growth has come environmental
problems, like where to get enough drinking
water. Georgia, Florida, and Alabama
have been fighting over who gets how
much water from rivers that flow through
the states. And, as Tanya Ott reports, a
decision in the federal lawsuit could effect
communities across the country:

Atlanta draws millions of gallons of drinking water each day from nearby Lake Lanier. But Alabama and Florida say it’s such a water hog, there might not be enough water sent on downstream to cool power plants or protect the seafood industry.

“I had no idea! (laughs) I didn’t really realize there was a problem.”

Atlanta-area resident Connie Brand says she knew the state was in a drought last year. She knew she was supposed to conserve water, and she did.

“Not taking such a long shower; not doing small loads of laundry.”

But only recently did she realize how big a problem this could be.

In July, federal Judge Paul Magnuson ruled that under the law Lake Lanier was intended only for things like navigation and flood control – not drinking water. He said if Florida, Georgia and Alabama don’t come to a water agreement by 2012, Atlanta has to stop taking drinking water from Lake Lanier.

“The action of a court could create a public health emergency that would probably rival the effects of Katrina.”

That’s Charles Krautler. He’s director of the Atlanta Regional Commission. He says in the past 25 years Atlanta’s population has more than doubled to 4 million residents and there’s no way to get water to people without Lake Lanier.

“How do you decide who doesn’t have water and who does? Our chairman likes to say, ‘FEMA doesn’t have enough trucks to bring in enough bottled water to deal with the shortfall that would exist.’”

It’s not just an issue for Atlanta. There are more than two dozen similar reservoirs around the country. They were built for navigation, flood control or hydropower. But communities are using them for drinking water. Congress might have to step in to basically retro-actively approve the drinking water use. Cindy Lowery is executive director of the Alabama Rivers Alliance.

“If it goes to Congress, which the court case says that it might have to, it could get even more political and more chaotic really.”

Several members of Congress have said they won’t act until Florida, Georgia and Alabama come to a deal. But Lowery says, so far, the negotiations have been dominated by government agencies and special interests like power companies. She wants a panel of neutral advisors and scientists to study the issue.

In the meantime, Atlanta residents like Connie Brand are left wondering what will happen.

“I’m from a family when they grew up they relied on cistern water, and when it rained you had water, and when it didn’t rain, you didn’t have water. So I’m familiar with having to ration and be careful about those kinds of things. But I don’t think my child or people of my generation, their children, have any concept of conservation of water or anything like that.”

Brand says she just might have to step up her own conservation efforts.

“What was it we had in college? If it’s yellow let it mellow, if it’s brown flush it down? (laughs) that’ll be our new motto! (laughs)”

For The Environment Report, I’m Tanya Ott.

Related Links

Coal Will Not Go Quietly

  • In the fall of 2007, the state of Kansas made the unprecedented decision to deny a power company permits for a coal plant because of greenhouse gas emissions. (Photo courtesy of the Energy Information Administration)

Reducing the greenhouse gases that
cause global warming will mean less
reliance on fossil fuels, such as coal.
Almost two years ago, Kansas became
the first state ever to deny permits
for a coal plant because of greenhouse
gas emissions. Since then, there have
been lawsuits on all sides. Even the
compromise the Governor in Kansas reached
with the coal company in May is now
stalled. Devin Browne reports that
coal just will not go quietly:

Transcript

Reducing the greenhouse gases that
cause global warming will mean less
reliance on fossil fuels, such as coal.
Almost two years ago, Kansas became
the first state ever to deny permits
for a coal plant because of greenhouse
gas emissions. Since then, there have
been lawsuits on all sides. Even the
compromise the Governor in Kansas reached
with the coal company in May is now
stalled. Devin Browne reports that
coal just will not go quietly:

The Sunflower Electric Power Corporation had actually applied and been
approved for a permit to build a new coal plant in 2002. But, for whatever
reason, they let the permit expire. Seemed like no big deal at the time
– they figured they’d get another one whenever they turned in another
application.

Except that they didn’t. In the fall of 2007, the state of Kansas made
the unprecedented decision to deny the power company. Cindy Hertel is with
Sunflower.

“It would be like going for your drivers license, taking the drivers
test, passing it, then being denied your drivers license because you
don’t drive a Prius. Can’t change the rules in the middle of the game.
And that’s what happened.”

Rod Bremby is the Secretary of Health and Environment in Kansas. He says
the state didn’t really change the rules on regulating CO2 because there
aren’t any rules on CO2. And since there’s no federal regulations,
Secretary Bremby instituted a state regulation. He said it would be
irresponsible not to regulate the gases causing climate change.

Stephanie Cole with the Sierra Club called it a watershed moment.

“We were excited, we were stunned – however, it wasn’t long after
that, legislators from Western Kansas started making comments that they
disapproved of Secretary Bremby’s decision and that they were going to
make legislative attempts to overturn the permit denial. So victory was
short-lived.”

Since then, the power company, Sunflower, has hired lobbyists. They’ve
helped legislators draft new bills to allow the coal-burning power plant.
The power company sued both the previous and current governor for civil
rights violations. For two years – nothing.

Then Kansas got a new governor – Mark Parkinson. Almost immediately
after he became governor last May, he cut a deal with Sunflower. Stop the
lawsuits. Build only one unit, not two or three. And, most importantly to
the Governor’s agenda, put in transmission lines to Colorado so that
Kansas can start exporting wind energy out of state.

Kansas is the third windiest state in the country. But it needs
infrastructure to get that wind-power to other states. And, in the
governor’s deal, power companies like Sunflower help build that
infrastructure.

Cole, with the Sierra Club, said the deal was very much a let-down.

“Because it is very troubling to many of us who have been involved in
this so long. It is such a disappointment.”

For a moment the battle seemed to be over. But, it wasn’t.

In July, Sunflower received a letter from the EPA asking them to submit a
new application for a permit. John Knodel is an environmental engineer
with the EPA.

“It’s not appropriate, in our mind, that they take an application that
was for three 700 MW units and simply say, ‘that was bigger, this project
is smaller.’ We say, ‘you have to go through a process and make it
very clear what this new project is all about.’”

Now that the EPA is stepping in, Sunflower & the Sierra Club are back to
square one.

The power company is expected to turn in its new application this fall.
The Sierra Club is expected to fight it. And Sunflower is expected to
fight back.

Cindy Hertel with Sunflower says the power company is just trying to keep
electricity bills low.

Hertel: “This is still in the best interest of our members.”

Browne: “This still makes sense economically?”

Hertel: “It still makes sense. What people need to know is that we are
cost biased, not fuel biased.”

Browne: “And, right now, for Sunflower, that means coal.”

But it might not be coal for very long.

The U.S. House passed a bill last winter that includes a hefty carbon tax
and incentives for renewable energy. A similar bill was recently
introduced in the Senate.

If it passes, Kansas might find its wind energy not only beats coal in
price, but wind-power could become the next big export for the state.

For The Environment Report, I’m Devin Browne.

Related Links

San Francisco Makes Composting Mandatory

  • San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom signs mandatory composting into law (Photo courtesy of the Press Office of Mayor Newsom)

San Francisco already leads the
nation in recycling. Now, that
city has the first mandatory
composting law in the country.
Emily Wilson reports that’s got
some people worried about “garbage
cops”:

Transcript

San Francisco already leads the
nation in recycling. Now, that
city has the first mandatory
composting law in the country.
Emily Wilson reports that’s got
some people worried about “garbage
cops”:

Putting recyclables into the blue bin is second nature for people in San Francisco.

But this new law now means also putting coffee grounds and eggshells into a green bin.

There are some people who are concerned about Big Brother looking through their garbage. And then there’s the $100 fine.

Mark Westlund at the Department of the Environment says ‘no worries.’ Not much is going to change.

“Well, we get a lot of calls from people who are worried about garbage cops and that frankly is not going to happen. For years now we’ve been looking in peoples recycling to make sure they’re doing it correctly and if not, they get a tag and if they continue misusing it, they get a letter and a follow up call and then a visit.”

So there are warnings before the fine.

Cities across the country will be watching San Francisco’s mandatory composting law to see how it goes.

For The Environment Report, I’m Emily Wilson.

Related Links

Illegal Drugs in Wastewater

  • A one day snapshot of wastewater from 96 cities and towns in Oregon shows that meth was found in many samples - not just larger urban areas (Photo courtesy of the journal Addiction)

A new report tracks illegal drug use by looking at wastewater. Rebecca Williams has more:

Transcript

A new report tracks illegal drug use by looking at wastewater. Rebecca Williams has more:

A lot of studies have found prescription drugs people take end up in wastewater, and now researchers are also tracking illegal drugs that way.

Caleb Banta-Green is the lead author of the report in the journal Addiction.

He studied a one day snapshot of wastewater from 96 cities and towns in Oregon.

He says cocaine and ecstasy were much more likely to be used in larger urban areas. But they found meth everywhere, even after a crackdown to make it harder to get the ingredients to make it.

“That sort of appetite or interest for methamphetamine has been built up in those rural areas and it looks like that use is continuing and it’s also being found in urban areas.”

He says it’s not clear if trace amounts of these drugs might eventually end up in drinking water. But previous studies indicate other kinds of legal drugs can be detected in sources of drinking water.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Styrene Industry Sues Over Cancer Listing

  • Styrene is one component in styrofoam containers (Photo by Renee Comet, courtesy of the National Cancer Institute)

The styrene industry is suing to stop environmental officials from saying styrene could cause cancer and birth defects. Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The styrene industry is suing to stop environmental officials from saying styrene could cause cancer and birth defects. Lester Graham reports:

Styrene is used in all kinds of products – containers like coffee cups, egg cartons, in construction, in cars.

The state of California wants to add it to a list of cancer-causing materials. The International Agency for Research on Cancer found styrene is “possibly carcinogenic to humans.”

Joe Walker is a spokesman for the Styrene Information and Research Center.

“Styrene is not a carginogen. Any listing that would categorize it as such basically would be illegal and would be erroneous and would have the potential of alarming the public unnecessarily about products that are made from styrene.”

If the court does allow California to put styrene on its cancer list, the styrene industry has a year to prove it doesn’t belong on that list.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Big Ships Dump Oil Into the Ocean

  • Ships dump 88 million gallons of oil into the ocean illegally each year - that's eight times the amount of the Exxon Valdez oil spill (Photo source: Vmenkov at Wikimedia Commons)

Each year, ships intentionally dump millions of gallons of oil into the oceans. Rebecca Williams reports everything from cruise ships to cargo ships to oil tankers have been caught:

Transcript

Each year, ships intentionally dump millions of gallons of oil into the oceans. Rebecca Williams reports everything from cruise ships to cargo ships to oil tankers have been caught:

Ships have all kinds of mechanical parts that use oil.

The ships are supposed to collect the waste oil and separate it out, but it turns out a lot of ships just dump it overboard.

Stacey Mitchell is chief of the environmental crimes section at the Department of Justice. She says some estimates are all this oil adds up to about 88 million gallons a year.

That’s eight times the amount of oil spilled by the Exxon Valdez. And those are just the ships they catch.

“As we do more and more of these enforcements the crews on board these vessels who are trying to defeat our purposes are getting craftier and are coming up with new ways to commit this crime and new ways to conceal it.”

Mitchell says it takes time and costs money to separate the oil the way you’re supposed to, and so they might think the chance of getting caught might be worth the risk. Though if you are caught, the fines can be in the millions of dollars.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Fighting for the Control of a River

  • Badin Mayor Jim Harrison stands on the steps of town hall. Alcoa’s old smelter looms behind. Alcoa once employed half the population of Badin, but the smelter closed in 2002. (Photo by Julie Rose)

In the dry American West, folks have been
duking it out over water for centuries.
But water shortages are new to the Southeast.
Many once thought the rivers would flow
forever. Now, North Carolina is emerging
from the worst drought in over a hundred
years. Julie Rose reports on a power
struggle has erupted over one of its
rivers:

Transcript

In the dry American West, folks have been
duking it out over water for centuries.
But water shortages are new to the Southeast.
Many once thought the rivers would flow
forever. Now, North Carolina is emerging
from the worst drought in over a hundred
years. Julie Rose reports on a power
struggle has erupted over one of its
rivers:

(sound of inside a truck)

From a one-lane road way above the Yadkin River, the trees are so thick you can just see
the water. It looks so tranquil that the Narrows Dam is a bit of a shock when you turn the
bend.

Rose: “Whoa, this thing’s huge.”
Ellis: “Yeah.” (chuckles)

(sound of climbing out of the truck)

I’m with Gene Ellis, who’s the head of Alcoa Power Generating.

(sound of water falling.)

For nearly 100 years, the aluminum company has owned and operated four dams on one
of North Carolina’s largest rivers. Now Alcoa is trying to renew that hydropower license
for 50 more years. But the Governor of North Carolina wants Alcoa’s dams for herself –
or rather for the people of North Carolina.

The federal law that governs America’s rivers does allow for a takeover, but it’s never
been done. And Alcoa’s Gene Ellis says it’s something he’d expect of a dictator.

“Alcoa’s only experience with the socialization or the nationalization of a plant was
in Venezuela during the leadership of Hugo Chavez.”

Ellis says the takeover attempt violates Alcoa’s property rights. Trouble is that while
Alcoa owns the dams, the people of North Carolina own the river. Alcoa’s basically a
tenant.

And North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue says it’s time to end the lease.

“We need to be sure that the water sources that we are allowing to be controlled – if
you will – by a private industry, produces something for North Carolina.”

Something like jobs, says Perdue, which is why Alcoa built the dams in the first place.
They used to power an aluminum smelter that was the main employer in the region.

In 2002, Alcoa closed the smelter, but still makes millions off the dams. It sells the
hydropower wholesale. Alcoa continues to pay taxes – and still offers free swimming
and fishing on the lakes – but the Governor says that’s not enough to deserve 50 more
years of control on the river.

Officials from at least seven counties agree. As do many residents, like Roger Dick.

“The state needs to be in control. We do not need to be, as citizens, having to go ask
a global company for how we will use our water.”

Ironically, Alcoa’s biggest support comes from towns on the four lakes it manages.
Especially Badin – where you can see the huge, empty smelter from the steps of the
mayor’s office.

Rose: “Did you work there?”

Harrison “Yes. 30 some years. That was our only industry and we’ve lost our heart
when we lost Alcoa.”

And yet, Badin Mayor Jim Harrison says-

“I would rather trust who I know than who I don’t know. Does the state not run our
highways? Do you really think they have done the best with our highways that can
be done? So, I’m mean, if they do the same job with our dams, what’s that gonna
end up being?”

Not even Governor Perdue can answer that yet. Nor is it clear how the transfer would
work or what the state might have to pay for it. Those decisions are up to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees thousands of hydropower licenses, but
has yet to take one over.

Talking to Mark Robinson – the commission’s director of energy projects – you can
practically hear him scratching his head through the phone line.

“We really can’t figure out what the idea was there. But I’m sure with the help of a
number of very smart lawyers we would all figure it out.”

Since Alcoa expected a decision on its license this summer, lawyers on both sides are
already working overtime.

People across the country are watching closely, because the outcome will set an
important precedent at a time when water is no longer the endless resource many once
thought.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Rose.

Related Links

Lifting Bans on Nuke Power Plants?

  • The nuclear power plant in Braidwood, Illinois, was started up just after the state banned new nuclear power construction. For its entire history, it's been operating without a permanent home for its spent nuclear fuel. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

There’s been plenty of buzz
about dozens of proposed nuclear power
reactors in the US. Well, Wall Street’s
financial mess is making power companies
scramble to find all the investment money
for them. But, in twelve states, it won’t
matter whether power companies have cash
in hand or not; it’s illegal to build new
nuclear power plants there. Shawn Allee
reports there are efforts to repeal some
of those bans:

Transcript

There’s been plenty of buzz
about dozens of proposed nuclear power
reactors in the US. Well, Wall Street’s
financial mess is making power companies
scramble to find all the investment money
for them. But, in twelve states, it won’t
matter whether power companies have cash
in hand or not; it’s illegal to build new
nuclear power plants there. Shawn Allee
reports there are efforts to repeal some
of those bans:


JoAnn Osmand represents a state legislative district in northeastern Illinois.

Nuclear power is close to her heart – there’s an old, dormant nuclear power plant in her
district. Osmond thought, maybe that plant could be useful again. So, she sat down with
the plant owner.

”And I asked a question: ‘Why are you not taking some of the parts away and
putting them in other nuclear locations?’ They said, ‘there’s a moratorium, we’re
not building any more nuclear plants in the state of Illinois.’”

Osmond was stunned.

Illinois has six existing nuclear power plants – she didn’t know it’s illegal to build more.
She hears plenty of gripes about energy prices – so she thought, why leave nuclear energy
off the table?

“I don’t want my granddaughters to have to buy their electricity from another state.
I want to be able in 2020, 2030 to be able to plug in our electric cars.”

Osmond’s bill to lift the moratorium stalled – it’s still illegal to build nuclear power
plants in Illinois. California and Wisconsin recently had similar fights over their nuclear
moratoria.

Some veterans of nuclear politics are shocked anyone would want to life a ban on nuclear
power plants.

“It makes absolutely no logical, rational sense in any mode of analysis.”

I find Dave Kraft at a coffee shop. Kraft is with the Nuclear Energy Information Service,
a group that’s worked against nuclear power for almost thirty years.

Twelve states severely restrict or ban new nuclear power plants. Kraft says seven have
language almost identical to Illinios’.

“The moratorium simply said, no more new construction of nuclear reactors until
the federal government has a demonstrated means of dealing with the waste
permanently.”

Kraft says states tried protecting themselves from becoming dumps for the most
dangerous nuclear waste – the radioactive spent fuel.

The federal government is supposed to store spent fuel – maybe in Yucca Mountain,
Nevada. But so far, that hasn’t happened, so it’s piling up in nuclear power plants – like
this one in Braidwood, Illinois, southwest of Chicago.

(sound of a door)

Bryan Hanson manages the Braidwood power plant. He leads me to a square storage
pool. It has the bluest water I’ve ever seen.

Hanson: “This is where we store our spent fuel. It’s about thirty feet of water
between us and the top of the fuel bundles down there. So you’re looking at thirty of
water and another twelve feet down below.”

Allee: “If you look into it, it’s almost like honeycomb.”

Hanson: “Honeycomb … looks like an egg crate or honeycomb. Within those cells
are fuel bundles that have been used in the reactor, generated energy, and now
they’re waiting for eventual disposal.”

Braidwood’s pool was meant for short-term storage, but spent fuel’s been stored here for
nineteen years. Hanson says the company is planning for when spent fuel will have to be
stored on-site, but outdoors, perhaps for decades.

It’s a situation the nuclear industry’s is unhappy about, but it’s confident the federal
government will come up with a solution – some day.

So, most power companies support removing bans on new plants. This drives critics like
Dave Kraft crazy.

“To build more reactors at a time when we have no place to put the waste makes no
sense at all. The first rule of waste management is, stop producing.”

Even though Kraft says it doesn’t make sense to lift bans on nuclear power plant
construction, he predicts those bans will get challenged again soon.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links