People Power vs. Bp

Earlier this summer, a state agency gave a refinery permission to increase pollution in
the Great Lakes. Commentator Cameron Davis takes a look at lessons learned and
what they mean for the future of the nation’s waterways:

Transcript

Earlier this summer, a state agency gave a refinery permission to increase pollution in
the Great Lakes. Commentator Cameron Davis takes a look at lessons learned and
what they mean for the future of the nation’s waterways:


When the Indiana Department of Environmental Management gave approval for BP’s
refinery to pollute more in Lake Michigan, who would have guessed that within weeks
more than 100,000 people would sign petitions against the proposal?


The people of the region seemed to instinctively know that more pollution had to be
stopped. After all, millions of us rely on Lake Michigan for drinking water and recreation.


Of course, coverage of the pollution proposal took off, with the Chicago Sun-
Times
calling for a boycott of BP gasoline. The New York Times and CBS
Evening News ran national pieces about the pollution increases. A bi-partisan coalition
of politicians from neighboring states cried foul, including Chicago Mayor Richard Daley,
U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Barack Obama, Representatives Rahm Emanuel, Mark Kirk, Jan
Schakowsky, Vern Ehlers and the entire Michigan Congressional delegation, among
others.


But while the media, elected officials, and even those of us in the conservation
community talked about the permit, the real story wasn’t about the permit. It wasn’t
about its allowance for 54 percent more ammonia and 35 percent more suspended
solids from treated sludge to be discharged.


It wasn’t even an argument about jobs versus the environment. That debate was discounted long
ago by the many businesses that decided or were mandated to pollute less and then
still prospered.


The real story was what you, the public, said and what you are saying now: how we
treat the Great Lakes is emblematic of how we treat our waterways all around the
country. You’re saying that you want a new standard of care for the nation’s waters. You
don’t want the standard to be “to keep things from getting worse.” You don’t want the
status quo. You want our waters to be proactively restored. You want it better.


Like those of us who used to be in the cub scouts, inspired to leave our campsites
better than the way we found them, you want the standard for our waters to be: leave
things better for the next generation.


HOST TAG: Cameron Davis is the president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes.

Related Links

Fish Stocking Taxing

  • As fewer Brown Trout from a state stocking program survive in the waters of Thunder Bay in Lake Huron, the fish takes on the allure of a trophy fish, especially since those that do survive can grow very large. Last year, a 28 pound Brown Trout won the tournament. It may be the biggest Brown ever to be caught in the state of Michigan. (Photo by Linda Stephan)

Most cities have their symbols. Imagine San Francisco without
the Golden Gate, New York without the Statue of Liberty, or
Miami without dolphins. Linda Stephan has the story of a
community that has linked itself with a fish that is not native to
its waters. And stocking that fish is costing taxpayers a lot:

Transcript

Most cities have their symbols. Imagine San Francisco without
the Golden Gate, New York without the Statue of Liberty, or
Miami without dolphins. Linda Stephan has the story of a
community that has linked itself with a fish that is not native to
its waters. And stocking that fish is costing taxpayers a lot:


The brown trout arrived in Lake Huron’s Thunder Bay by a
fluke. Back in the 1970s, about a thousand fish – surplus stocks
from inland waters – were simply tossed out into the bay by
biologists, as if the bay were a trash bin.


No one expected them to survive. They thought they’d just be
food for other fish. But the brown trout did survive. They
quickly grew large and feisty. The state started to stock these
waters with young brown trout every year because anglers
liked catching them.


In fact, it was so popular, they named a fishing tournament after
it: the brown trout Festival in Alpena, Michigan. This year, a
crowd of hundreds gathered, despite periodic rain showers, as
festival o-“FISH”-als weighed in a day’s catch… lake trout, walleye:


(Sound of announcer at tournament)


You don’t need a brown trout to win at the brown trout
Festival. And it’s a good thing because these days, most boats
don’t catch even one. That’s because things have changed.


The ecosystems of Lake Huron and the other Great Lakes are
changing rapidly, as foreign invasive species, such as the zebra and
quagga mussels, steal away food at the bottom of the lake’s
food web.


Plus, a migratory bird that’s been showing up in this bay in huge
numbers, cormorants, have been eating the small browns
stocked by state fish nurseries before the fish ever make it into
open waters.


For the past decade, the Brown hasn’t survived all that well in
Lake Huron. So today biologists estimate that, taking into
account all those fish that don’t survive, every time an angler
catches a big Brownie, it now costs taxpayers close to
three hundred dollars.


In other words, each brown trout caught represents about
three hundred dollars spent by the state stocking program.
Even though the brown trout is not native, people here say the
fish belongs in these waters.


Hobbyist Dick Cadarette at the brown trout Festival says the Brown has a special allure for
the angler:


“Well, because they’re the best eating and they’re the hardest to
catch. That’s why we call it the brown trout because anybody
can catch a steelhead – I mean a lake trout – but they can’t
everybody catch a Brown.”


As the large fish becomes more and more elusive, it takes on
the allure of a trophy fish.


Fisheries Biologist Dave Fielder says because of the cost – for
years now – the state has had good reason to quit stocking these
waters with brown trout, but they still haven’t. No one’s
willing to see the namesake of the brown trout Festival
disappear:


“What’s always amazed me is how the natural resources in
Michigan, including the fisheries that we enjoy in the Great
Lakes, is really a part of that local heritage and quality of
life for these local communities and becomes an important part of the local existance and indentity it’s important that we
as scientists don’t lose sight of that.”


But some say the fact that the local community has gotten used
to seeing the brown trout does not mean it belongs in the lake.
Mark Ebener is a Fisheries Biologist for the Chippewa-Ottawa
Resource Authority. It regulates fishing for five Native
American tribes:


“You tell a lie long enough and sooner or later people
believe it and accept it as the truth. You know it’s not that
brown trout belong here. brown trout were introduced
and they continue to be defined as an introduced species
into North America.”


Ebener says since the brown trout does no harm to native fish,
such as the lake trout, his organization doesn’t oppose the
stocking program. But he also says at the current cost, the
brown trout is a clear waste of taxpayer money.


Back in Alpena, Biologist Dave Fielder agrees the state can’t
keep stocking the lake with browns if so few continue to
survive. But, an angler himself, he looks with envy on a
mounted brown that took last year’s top prize in the tournament,
an unbelievable 28.2 pounds:


“Can you imagine landin’ that fish? That must have been
somethin’. Anybody’s who’s caught fish can look at that and imagine the battle they must’ve went through and the excitement they must’ve felt. And those are real feelings and that’s not to be
trivialized.”


That’s evidence to Fielder, and others who fish these waters,
that at least some brown trout have what it takes to complete
for food in the changing ecosystems of Lake Huron.


For the Environment Report, I’m Linda Stephan.

Related Links

Ethanol Part 1: Running the Well Dry?

  • Ethanol is starting to bring prosperity to some rural communities. But there are also concerns about whether adding this new industry to other industries - and cities - that draw on groundwater supplies will cause local shortages of water. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

It’s no surprise that the Corn Belt is the heart of the ethanol boom.
Two main ingredients you need to make ethanol are corn and water.
There’s no shortage of corn of course, and in most places it’s assumed
there’s also plenty of water. But as Rebecca Williams reports, even
people in water-rich states are getting concerned about ethanol’s
thirst for groundwater:

Transcript

It’s no surprise that the Corn Belt is the heart of the ethanol boom.
Two main ingredients you need to make ethanol are corn and water.
There’s no shortage of corn of course, and in most places it’s assumed
there’s also plenty of water. But as Rebecca Williams reports, even
people in water-rich states are getting concerned about ethanol’s
thirst for groundwater:


Bob Libra can tell a lot about water by looking at rocks. We’re in his
rock library – it even has a Dewey decimal system. Libra’s holding up
one of the 35,000 chunks of rock in here.


(Sound of scraping on limestone core)


“This for example is a core from a well. You can look at this and say well this is
what the plumbing system’s like down there.”


Libra’s a state geologist with the Iowa Department of Natural
Resources. Part of his job is to figure out how healthy his state’s
water supplies are. Any time a test well is drilled for a new ethanol
plant, rock samples get sent here.


Outside the rock library, there are three red pipes sticking up out of
the ground. These are observation wells that tap into sources of
groundwater far underground, called deep aquifers:


“A lot of people refer to it as Paleo-water or fossil water. It’s been
down there tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of
years.”


Libra says the water in those deep aquifers is pumped out for
everything from drinking water to ethanol plants. But as it’s pumped
out, it’s not replaced right away. It could take hundreds or thousands
of years to replenish the aquifers.


Geologists use the observation wells and rock samples to figure out how
much water is in those aquifers. But here at the rock library, those
samples are piling up into small mountains in the storage room. Bob
Libra says his state is way behind. Iowa hasn’t updated its groundwater
maps for 20 years:


“I think Iowa’s in the same kind of situation that a lot of states that
tend not to think of themselves as ‘water poor’ are finding themselves.
We haven’t paid attention to it for 20 years and suddenly BANG we’re
using an awful lot. And we have people every day going I’m interested
in putting a plant here – how much water can I get over here? And it’s
happening very rapidly.”


Each state has its own way of managing its groundwater. In Iowa, you
have to have a permit if you’re withdrawing more than 25,000 gallons of
water per day from a well or stream. Libra says the ethanol boom has
overwhelmed the state office where permits are handed out for the
asking:


“I’m at this location, I’m drilling into this aquifer, I’m going
to extract this amount of water. Here’s my $25 for a 10-year permit.”


Libra says nobody’s really checking to see if all these water
withdrawals will work for the next few decades.


How much water ethanol plants consume depends on who you talk to. But
on average, it takes between three and four gallons of water to make
one gallon of ethanol. Bob Libra says here in Iowa, adding new ethanol
plants is like adding a bunch of new towns out in the cornfields:


“A lot of ethanol plants they’re building now are on the order of 100
million gallon per year capacity so they’d be using about 400 million
gallons of water a year which is roughly as much as a town of 10,000
people.”


In some drier states, new ethanol plants are running into opposition.
Mark Muller is with the Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy. He
says groundwater is local. So, what works in one place might be a
crisis in another:


“We’ve already seen it in Southwest Minnesota where a plant was denied because
of a lack of water resources. There’s a couple big fights going on in
Kansas right now over water availability. I think this is going to
probably one of the big drivers that’s going to make the industry look
further East rather than in the Midwest/Great Plains.”


The ethanol industry argues that it has already cut back on water use.
Lucy Norton is the managing director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels
Association. She says it’s in the industry’s best interest to be
careful with water:


“We’re not going to see a plant built somewhere where it’s an iffy
situation as to whether 10 years from now we’re going to have enough
water. You don’t put $200 million investment into a location that’s
not going to be able to sustain itself 10 years from now.”


But even if the water supplies could last 50 years, once the water is
gone from the aquifers, it’s gone for a long time.


There are a lot of
test wells going in these days, with 123 plants in operation and more
than 80 under construction around the country.


The growing political pressure for more and more ethanol is making
state officials eager to figure out exactly what’s underground, instead
of just assuming there’s enough water.


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Greener Lawncare

  • Lawncare can be one of the most polluting and wasteful activities at a home. Simple actions can reduce the impact. (Photo by Lester Graham)

Polls indicate the majority of people want to do better toward the environment. One
of the most polluting activities at many homes is lawn care. Lawn sprinklers can use massive
amounts of water. And over-use of fertilizer can pollute nearby streams. Lester Graham looks at simple things you can do to reduce waste and pollution and still
have a green lawn:

Transcript

Polls indicate the majority of people want to do better toward the environment. One
of the most polluting activities at many homes is lawn care. Lawn mowers spew out
emissions that pollute at a higher rate than cars. Lawn sprinklers can use massive
amounts of water. And over-use of fertilizer can pollute nearby streams. Lester Graham looks at simple things you can do to reduce pollution and still
have a green lawn:


It figures that the day I went to talk to a turf expert about mowing and lawn care, it’d be raining.


“Well, we needed it. So, I guess that’s the good thing about it.”


Tom Smith is the Executive Director of the Michigan Turfgrass Foundation. He’s got
all kinds of recommendations for how to properly prep soil for beginning lawns, but we wanted
to limit this story to some simple, practical things we can do with an existing lawn to
reduce the impact to the environment:


“One of the first things and easiest things you can do is mow high. In fact, I tell most
consumers, most residential facilities, mow as high as you can set your mower.
Because, what that will do is you’ll get a better root system, you’ll get more shading
of that soil and you’ll have far less water loss.”


Smith works closely with the Michigan State University’s turf grass research
program. One of the things they’ve learned there goes against some of the advice
you might have heard in the past about watering. In research that’s been going on
since 1982, they’ve let Mother Nature take care of one plot. Another gets deep
waterings a couple of times a week, and a third gets daily watering, light rates, in the
middle of the heat of the day.


The plot that looks best year after year? The one that
gets light watering, daily during the middle of the day. Most of the water evaporates,
but it reduces the heat stress on the grass so it doesn’t go dormant and brown. And
Smith says it actually uses less water:


“In that research, we were able to reduce water use by about half by doing daily
watering at light rates in the middle of the day compared to that deep infrequent
watering.”


(Graham:) “Now, there are going to be some people who say ‘Look, I don’t want to
use water in a cosmetic way at all. Is there a grass that doesn’t use the kind of water
that most grasses we know do?”


(Smith:) “Actually, there is one of our grasses that we recommend called Turf Type
Tall Fescue. Turf Type Tall Fescue is our most drought-tolerant grass. In most
summers it will stay green without any supplemental water.”


And Smith says before you start spreading fertilizer on your lawn, you should get a soil
test to see exactly what you need. It’s an eight to ten dollar test that can be done by
your county extension office, and it’s good for about three years. If you put fertilizer
down without knowing, you’re probably adding to the phosphorous and nitrogen
pollution problems in the streams and lakes in your area and beyond.


Keeping your equipment running well also helps reduce pollution: an oil change in
the lawn mower, cleaning the air filter and sharpening your mower blades.


(Sound of grinding)


Mark Collins maintains the turf plots at Michigan State University’s turf grass
program. His crew sharpens their blades every third mowing, but they’re probably
mowing a lot more than you do:


“Probably a homeowner should at least once a month. Just keep the blade sharp.
That’s the biggest thing. If it’s a sharp blade, then it cuts the grass cleanly and you
don’t get a frayed edge on the grass blade.”


And Collins says a mulching mower is best because it cuts the grass blades into tiny
bits that help fertilize the lawn, and reduces the need for bagging your clippings.


So, using less water, planting hardy grass, using only the fertilizer you need, keeping
your machinery in good working order and buying the least polluting models all help.
But, there are soulutions, such as planting more drought resistant shrubs and trees
so there’s not as much grass to mow. And if you’re really adventurous, you
can get a manual reel mower, one with no engine. It just uses the energy you
provide by pushing it.


(Sound of reel mower)


For the Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Gao: Biofuel Distribution Problems

  • The GAO found distribution of biofuels is an obstacle to its wider use. (Photo by Lester Graham)

The federal government has no comprehensive plan to deal with an expected
increase in the production of biofuels. That’s according to a new study from
the Government Accountability Office. Dustin Dwyer reports that the lack of
a plan has some real consequences:

Transcript

The federal government has no comprehensive plan to deal with an expected
increase in the production of biofuels. That’s according to a new study from
the Government Accountability Office. Dustin Dwyer reports that the lack of
a plan has some real consequences:


Mark Gaffigan studies energy issues for the GAO. He says there are real problems
getting biofuel capable vehicles where they need to be. For example, when officials at the Post Office tried to buy these so-called flex-fuel vehicles, the only options available were trucks with a larger engine than it needed. On top of that, officials had trouble getting biofuel, so they just ran the vehicles on gasoline.


“So, in effect, what you had was the government with vehicles using more fuel, using
more oil because they weren’t as efficient, when the intent was to try to encourage people
to use flex-fuel vehicles and use some of this ethanol to displace oil.”


The GAO says the Secretary of Energy needs to develop a new strategy that considers
both the production and distribution of biofuels.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Protesters Target Pvc

Last week, America’s 6th largest retailer Target was handed 10,000 signatures at its Annual Shareholders meeting. The petition urges the company to phase out the use of PVC plastic in the products it sells. Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports:

Transcript

Last week, America’s 6th largest retailer Target was handed 10 thousand
signatures at its Annual Shareholders meeting. The petition urges the
company to phase out the use of PVC plastic in the products it sells.
Lisa Ann Pinkerton reports:


(Sound of protestors)


Protesters at Target’s Shareholder meeting wore white hazmat suits as
they urged the company to phase out PVC, or Polyvinyl Chloride. PVC is
used in packaging, shower curtains, teething rings and other consumer
products it sells. Mark Schade is a spokesman for the Center for
Health, Environment and Justice:


We’re concerned about PVC because from manufacture to disposal PVC is
the worst plastic for our health and environment. Releasing chemicals
that are known to cause cancer, learning disabilities, reproductive
health problems, birth defects and many other health issues.


Target says it’s asking its suppliers to look into alternatives for PVC
but the company is reluctant to set a timetable for phasing out the
plastic. Other companies, such as Wal-Mart, Ikea, Johnson and Johnson,
Lego, Nike, Microsoft have already begun the process.


For the Environment Report, I’m Lisa Ann Pinkerton.

Related Links

Road Salt Damage

  • Overuse of salt can cause damage to concrete, steel and the environment. (Photo by Lester Graham)

Each year about 118,000 people are hurt and 1,300 people are killed on
the roads during snowy and icy conditions. So, snowplows hit the
roads, scraping snow and ice off the surface… and spreading
incredible amounts of salt on highways, streets and roads to help keep
them clear. Lester Graham reports there’s some concern about the long-
term effects of all that salt:

Transcript

Each year about 118,000 people are hurt and 1,300 people are killed on
the roads during snowy and icy conditions. So, snowplows hit the
roads, scraping snow and ice off the surface… and spreading
incredible amounts of salt on highways, streets and roads to help keep
them clear. Lester Graham reports there’s some concern about the long-
term effects of all that salt:


This dump truck is getting ready for a load of salt for a coming
winter storm. Salt helps make icy roads safer. It helps prevent
people from slipping and falling on sidewalks. And… it’s pretty
cheap. But there are problems with salt. Salt pollutes and salt
corrodes.


Mark Cornwell has spent a good deal of his career trying to convince
highway crews that there are better ways to keep things safe and reduce
how much salt is dumped on roads and sidewalks:


“Salt basically damages just about everything it comes in contact
with. Salt moves through concrete and attacks structural steel,
bridges, roads, parking structures; it eats the mortar out of bricks
and foundations. It damages limestone, you know, just on and on and
on.”


So, even though salt is cheap, the damage it does costs a lot. It’s a
hidden cost that’s seldom calculated. Imagine the cost of having to
replace a bridge five years early because the structure is weakened by
salt. And then there are your direct costs: trying to keep salt
washed off your vehicle, and still seeing rust attack your car.


Cornwell says there are some cities and road commissioners working to
reduce the amount of salt spread on the roads. But in most places, the
political pressure to get the salt trucks out early, and laying it on
thick to keep drivers happy, outweighs any concerns about trying to
reduce the salt:


“I’m sure the public expects full attention to snow and ice. And they
have absolutely no understanding, however, of what it costs to provide
that.”


Nobody thought a lot about the damage salt was causing until the last
couple of decades. In a few places, the people responsible for keeping
the roads and walkways safe have been trying to reduce the amount of
salt they use and still keep public safety tops on the list of
concerns:


“So, this is our shops. The brine-maker is right here.”


Marvin Petway is showing me some of the tools in his arsenal to reduce
how much salt is used and still keep things safe. He works at the
University of Michigan, where there’s a goal to cut the amount of salt
used in winter in half. What they’ve learned is using innovative ways
of putting down salt can actually help melt snow and ice faster. One
way is to mix it with water to get the chemicals in salt working
a little more quickly:


“Why use 5 pounds of rock salt when you can use 2 gallons of liquid
salt? We’re able to get better coverage, quicker, better cost, and
we’re putting the material that is effective in reducing ice build-up
directly to the area where we don’t want ice located.”


The crews trying to reduce salt use computer assisted spreaders to
measure out only the salt needed, they mix in less corrosive chemicals
that make salt brine more effective, and even just wetting the salt in
dump trucks with chemicals all help to melt snow and ice faster and in
the end use a lot less salt.


Nothing is going to replace salt altogether, but those efforts can add
up to a lot less salt. That means less destruction of infrastructure.


But there are more reasons for reducing salt than the damage to
roadways and parking decks. Salt also damages the environment:


Mark Cornwell first noticed the effects of salt because he was a
horticulturalist. He’d work all spring, summer and fall planting
shrubs, make the grass green, tending beds of flowers. Then the winter
would come:


“Unfortunately what we were doing in six months of winter was
undoing everything we did in the other six months of the year.
If you’re going to get ahead, you’ve got to solve the problem
and in my mind, that was misuse of salt.”


Use too much salt and it kills plants. And it turns out the cost of
using all that cheap salt could be even greater than anyone guessed.
For decades, it’s been assumed that rain washed away most of the salt, but
studies in Ontario find that a lot of the salt doesn’t get washed
away.


Instead, a good deal of it is percolating down into shallow aquifers.
Researchers predict that in the future we’ll start find salt is getting
into the groundwater that supplies many of the wells where we get our
drinking water.


For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

The Price of Global Warming

  • Some industries are working with government to voluntarily reduce greenhouse gas emissions. People who are worried about their personal CO2 emissions can buy carbon offsets, but there are dozens of programs, making it confusing. (Photo by Lester Graham)

There’s evidence that the Earth is changing
because of global warming. Glaciers are receding.
Polar ice caps are melting. Weather patterns are
altered. That’s prompted some people to look
for ways to reduce their personal contribution to
global warming. Rebecca Williams reports there
are many new companies that claim to help you do
that… for a price:

Transcript

There’s evidence that the Earth is changing
because of global warming. Glaciers are receding.
Polar ice caps are melting. Weather patterns are
altered. That’s prompted some people to look
for ways to reduce their personal contribution to
global warming. Rebecca Williams reports there
are many new companies that claim to help you do
that… for a price:


Whenever you drive, fly, or ride, you’re emitting carbon dioxide. And it’s not just the way you get around. It’s also any time you turn on lights or plug into an electrical outlet. More than half of the electricity in the U.S. comes from power plants that burn
coal and that’s another major source of carbon dioxide.


It’s a problem because carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas.
The vast majority of scientists agree all this carbon dioxide
that people produce is trapping heat in the atmosphere and making
the planet warmer.


David Archer is a climate scientist at the University of Chicago:


“The problem with fossil fuels is that the cost of that climate
change isn’t paid by the person who makes the decision to use
fossil energy so it’s sort of like a bill we’re leaving to future
generations.”


Some people say there’s a way to pay that bill now. About three
dozen companies and nonprofits have sprung up in the past few
years. They’re selling carbon offsets.


The idea of a carbon offset is to balance out the carbon dioxide
that you emit. In theory, you can do this by investing in
something like tree planting or energy projects that don’t emit
greenhouse gasses, such as wind or solar power.


First, you can go to one of the group’s websites and calculate
your carbon footprint. That’s all the carbon dioxide you produce
by driving, flying, and so on, in a year. North Americans have
especially big footprints.


The companies assign a price per ton of carbon that’s emitted.
You can decide how much of your carbon-emitting you want to
balance out. Then you type in your credit card number and voila… no more guilt.


Well, that’s the idea anyway.


But what if you buy a carbon offset
but you don’t change your behavior? If you keep driving and
flying and using electricity just as much as before, or maybe
more than before, you’re still a part of the problem.


“You’re absolutely still emitting the carbon. The idea is that
you’re balancing it out through reductions elsewhere.”


Tom Arnold is a cofounder of Terrapass. It’s a carbon offset
company:


“Now this isn’t the optimal solution of course – you should stop
driving. But it’s a good way that we can get you involved in the
dialogue and help you reduce emissions somewhere else.”


And you can get a little sticker for your car to show you’re in
the offsetting club. But Tom Arnold admits there aren’t a whole
lot of drivers of huge SUVs buying offsets.


“We have this nice little SUV sticker – it’s pretty expensive and
a horrible seller. Most of our members already drive passenger
cars, very efficient cars. They’re just looking for a tool to
balance the rest of their impact out to zero.”


Erasing your carbon footprint sounds pretty positive, but there
are quite a few critics of the carbon offset industry. They
point out there aren’t any agreed-on standards for what an offset
is, and prices are all over the map. So it’s not always clear
what you’re getting for your money.


Mark Trexler is president of Trexler Climate and Energy Services.
He’s a consultant who reviews the groups selling carbon offsets.
He says you do have to ask questions about what you’re buying:


“Am I putting my money into something that wouldn’t have happened
anyway? Because if somebody would’ve built that windmill anyway
or if they would’ve done whatever it is you’re putting money into
anyway, you’re really not rendering yourself climate neutral.”


Trexler says there are certification programs in the works so
consumers can know more about what they’re buying. But the people
who are buying offsets now say it feels like they’re making a
difference.


Kate Madigan bought offsets. She started thinking about it when
she was awake at night worrying about the world her new baby
would live in:


“Some people say oh, global warming, it’s going to change the
world in 100 years, but I’ll be gone by then. But I think that’s
a horrible way to look at things because we’re leaving the world
to a lot of people that we love.”


Madigan says she doesn’t think carbon offsets alone will really
solve the problem. She says she thinks it’ll take a lot of
harder choices too, like driving less and using less electricity.


Supporters say that’s the real power of offsets. It’s getting
people to talk about the role they play in global warming.


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Colleges Graded on Sustainability

A new report on sustainability is grading
the top 100 colleges and universities in the
country. Tracy Samilton reports the grades
reflect the institution’s environmental and
endowment practices:

Transcript

A new report on sustainability is grading
the top 100 colleges and universities in the
country. Tracy Samilton reports the grades
reflect the institution’s environmental and
endowment practices:


The top 100 colleges and universities in the country just got their
report cards grading them on sustainability. There are a few A’s, a
lot of B’s and C’s, and more D’s than you might really hope to see.


Mark Orlowski is head of Sustainable Endowments Institute. He says
colleges were graded in seven areas, including recycling and whether
the institution considers more than profit when managing its endowment
portfolio.


He says Dartmouth, for example, buys locally produced food, and
Stanford stands out for its endowment practices:


“We recognize Stanford for being the first school in the
country to adopt climate change shareholder voting guidelines.”


Orlowski says he hopes the annual report will encourage colleges to
make sustainability more of a priority.


For the Environment Report, I’m Tracy Samilton.

Related Links

Azm Phaseout Leaves Fruit Farmers Hanging

Environmental groups are considering resuming their lawsuit against the EPA. They say it’s a travesty the agency has tacked an extra couple of years onto their original plan to phase out a widely used pesticide. But some fruit growers are struggling to find an alternative that’s as effective as what they’re losing. Bob Allen reports their industry has little margin for error:

Transcript

Environmental groups are considering resuming their lawsuit against the EPA. They say it’s a travesty the agency has tacked an extra couple of years onto their original plan to phase out a widely used pesticide. But some fruit growers are struggling to find an alternative that’s as effective as what they’re losing. Bob Allen reports their industry has little margin for error:


Azinphos methyl or AZM is the main insecticide used in cherry and apple orchards. The cherry industry has zero tolerance for any insect parts found in the fruit. Whole truckloads of cherries have been dumped because of a single fruit fly maggot.


Michigan State University researcher Mark Whalon says so far there’s no alternative to AZM that can do the job. He’s been testing the use of alternatives in orchards for the last three years.


“Other locations where cherries are grown can use these compounds, export them into our markets and essentially put us out of business because they can grow cherries at a very much reduced cost.”


This spring EPA planned to phase out AZM on fruit by 2010. But a week ago the agency decided to allow its use to continue two years beyond that.


For The Environment Report, I’m Bob Allen.

Related Links