Chicken Feces in Cattle Feed

  • Author David Kirby says cattle eating cattle by-product could risk another outbreak of mad cow disease. The FDA says there’s no measurable risk. (Photo courtesy of the USDA)

The hamburger you put on the grill this weekend could be from cattle raised on feed that includes chicken feces. Lester Graham reports…a year-old Food and Drug Administration rule says it’s safe:

Transcript

The hamburger you put on the grill this weekend could be from cattle raised on feed that includes chicken feces. Lester Graham reports…a year-old Food and Drug Administration rule says it’s safe.

The rule came about after the mad cow disease outbreak. It made some changes, but still allows putting chicken litter – that’s the straw, feathers, chicken manure and scattered food left after raising chickens in a building– into cattle feed.

David Kirby wrote a book entitled “Animal Factory.” He says the government buckled to the chicken industry because the industry didn’t have a place to go with all the chicken litter.

“There’s too much to spread on local farmland, so they very often put it into cattle feed. It contains urea which cows can convert into protein.”

Chickens are messy. They scatter their feed and it gets into the chicken litter that’s put in some cattle feed. Some chicken feed contains beef by-products. Kirby says cattle eating cattle by-product could risk another outbreak of mad cow disease. The FDA says there’s no measurable risk.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Shell Walks Away From Oil Shale

  • Shell says that even though it's no longer pursing water rights on the Yampa River right now, it's in no way backing off its larger ambitions for oil shale. (Photo courtesy of the US DOE)

Extracting oil from oil shale takes a lot of water. Most of the oil shale in the U.S. is in areas where there’s not a lot of water. Conrad Wilson reports, one big oil company seems to be walking away from oil shale for that reason. But not everyone thinks that’s the case.

Transcript

Extracting oil from oil shale takes a lot of water. Most of the oil shale in the U.S. is in areas where there’s not a lot of water. Conrad Wilson reports, one big oil company seems to be walking away from oil shale for that reason. But not everyone thinks that’s the case.

In the Western US, some energy companies are betting big on oil shale. That’s a process of basically heating up a shale rock into a liquid that’s eventually refined into oil. But the global recession and the threat of climate change might be giving those companies second thoughts. Add to that a increasingly limited water supply, and oil shale looks like a risky investment.

The process of creating oil shale is energy intensive and uses a lot of water. That’s a problem in the arid West. As the population grows, the value of water is increasing.

Royal Dutch Shell has the most invested in developing an oil shale technology that works. So earlier this year when the company announced it was pulling away from water rights, it sent shock waves through the industry.

“I read that decision as Shell’s acknowledgment that oil shale is a long way off and that this was a really controversial filing and that in a sense it’s not worth it.”

That’s Claire Bastable of the Western Energy Project. It’s an environmental group that keeps on eye on energy issues in the West. Shell had been pursuing water rights on the Yampa River, in the Northwest portion Colorado.

“Shell’s decision was a big deal. We’re talking about 15 billion gallons of water. … It would have basically taken the Yampa River, which is one of the the last free flowing rivers in the West and diverted a huge proportion of it to Shell for potential oil shale development.”

Bastable says the 15 billion gallons Shell was seeking is about three times the amount the city of Boulder, Colorado uses in a year.

But, Shell knows a lot of oil can be extracted from the oil shale. It’s estimated that there are 800 billion barrels of usable oil in the shale – in Wyoming, Colorado and Utah.

Dr. Jeremy Boak researches oil shale development at the Colorado School of Mines. He says Shell could be simply postponing extracting that oil. Boak believes oil shale has a future, but it’s still decades away.

“With all of the comments they’ve made about what the time scale for oil shale, Shell has been pretty comfortable that this is going to take time.”

Shell says that even though it’s no longer pursing water rights on the Yampa River right now, it’s in no way backing off its larger ambitions for oil shale.

The company wouldn’t provide someone to comment for this story, but in a statement the company said:

The “ultimate goal is to create a commercial oil shale recovery operation that is economically viable, environmentally responsible and socially sustainable.”

That statement adds timing depends on government regulation and the market. The company could be waiting to see what the government does about climate change and how that affects fossil fuel costs. Shell could also be waiting for oil prices go up before deciding whether oil shale worth the effort.

Eric Kuhn heads up water management for the Colorado River District. He monitors much of the state’s water West of the Continental Divide. Kuhn says there’s probably enough water for oil shale development right now, but it’s hard to say for how long.

“I don’t think they’re dropping the filing changes anything. I think those companies are dedicated to and still have a plan to develop the oil shale resource if they can find a technology that is economically productive or if they can produce the oil shale at a competitive price, I think they will do it.”

Environmentalists in the region hope they won’t. They say Shell’s decision not to pursue the water right now should be a signal to others… oil shale just might not be worth the effort.

For The Environment Report, I’m Conrad Wilson.

Related Links

The Skinny on High Fructose Corn Syrup

  • A Princeton University research team lead by psychology professor Bart Hoebel (pictured) demonstrated that rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gain significantly more weight than those with access to water sweetened with table sugar. (Photo courtesy of Princeton University, Denise Applewhite)

We know eating too much sweet stuff puts on the pounds. A new study suggests the kind of sweet stuff matters too. Shawn Allee reports:

Transcript

We know eating too much sweet stuff puts on the pounds.

Shawn Allee reports a new study suggests the kind of sweet stuff matters, too.

Food companies mostly sweeten things with table sugar, called sucrose, or they use high fructose corn syrup.
Dr. Bart Hoebel is at Princeton University.

A while back, his team fed rats regular food and let them drink watered-down sucrose to see if they’d put on fat.
They didn’t.

But, recently he let rats eat the same food, but drink a solution of high-fructose corn syrup.

“The ones with the high-fructose corn syrup became significantly fatter.

Corn sweetener companies dismiss the study since it involves rats, not people.”

Hoebel says rat studies point out where we should do human studies later.

“So we want to find out if the kind of sugar matters as the food producers are putting sugar in more and more things.”

More research on corn syrup is in the pipeline, including work on animals and people.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Food Going to Waste

  • On average, Americans weigh 20 pounds more than they did back in 1974. (Photo courtesy of the National Cancer Institute)

Americans’ waistlines have been
expanding for decades. But new
research suggests at the same time,
more and more food is going to waste.
Shawn Allee reports:

Transcript

Americans’ waistlines have been
expanding for decades. But new
research suggests at the same time,
more and more food is going to waste.
Shawn Allee reports:

On average, Americans weigh 20 pounds more than they did back in 1974.

But Kevin Hall found there’s more to the story. He studies nutrition at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Hall’s research revealed we produce more food to keep up with our bigger appetites, but he also found we’re wasting more.

“We were kinda shocked to see that the rate of increase of food supply was greater than the rate of increase of food consumption we calculated. Somewhere along the supply chain from the farm to the dinner table, that food was wasted.”

Kevin Hall estimates well more than one third of our food production goes to waste.

He says it’s not clear who’s to blame, but someone should find out because food production uses a lot of water and fuel.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Interview: Nature Improves Productivity

  • Not everyone can get out and walk along the Lake Superior coastline everyday, but researchers say any walk in a natural setting will help. They count an increase in productivity among the benefits. (Photo courtesy of Dave Hansen.)

You’ve probably heard about studies that show enjoying nature can reduce stress. Well, a new study published in the journal Psychological Science shows a walk in nature can also help you focus better. It can improve your memory and attention. Lester Graham asked one of the researchers, Marc Berman from the University of Michigan, if he was up for a walk:

Transcript

You’ve probably heard about studies that show enjoying nature can reduce stress. Well, a new study published in the journal Psychological Science shows a walk in nature can also help you focus better. It can improve your memory and attention. Lester Graham asked one of the researchers, Marc Berman from the University of Michigan, if he was up for a walk:

Marc Berman was one of the co-authors of a study on nature and focus published in the journal Psychological Science. He spoke – and walked – with The Environment Report’s Lester Graham.

Related Links

Wind Tax Credit Blowing Away?

  • Wind companies want taxpayer help (Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy)

The wind power industry has been growing.
But to keep growing, wind companies want more
taxpayer help. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

The wind power industry has been growing.
But to keep growing, wind companies want more
taxpayer help. Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Some of the recent growth in wind generation is being fueled by a national
production tax credit. It’s due to expire at the end of this year.

The American Wind Energy Association is asking the public to encourage Congress to renew the
credit.

Association spokesman Jeff Anthony says, without the tax break, there’d be a slow down in new
wind projects and a potential loss of jobs.

“The longer it takes, the more in danger we’re putting the jobs in the wind industry at risk from a
drop-off in activity, both in project installations and in new manufacturing installations in this
country. So we need the PTC extended as soon as possible.”

Anthony acknowledges there’s a dispute in Congress over how to pay for the credit. Some
critics call the production tax credit ‘corporate welfare’.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Study: Biofuels Grow Dead Zone

There’s another possible downside to the national
boom in the production of corn-based ethanol. A new
study says increased ethanol production would further
pollute the Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico. Chuck
Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

There’s another possible downside to the national
boom in the production of corn-based ethanol. A new
study says increased ethanol production would further
pollute the Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico. Chuck
Quirmbach reports:

Most of the ethanol currently made comes from corn grown in the central part of
the US.

Chris Kucharik is part of a team of researchers that has been studying
what agricultural fertilizers do to the Mississippi River Basin. Kucharik says,
based on his study, ramping up the growing of corn for ethanol would increase
nutrient pollution in the river by 10 to 20%.

“That pretty much will make it impossible for us to reach a goal of reducing
nitrogen export by the Mississippi River.”

Kucharik says nitrogen pollution already contributes to a huge dead zone in the
Gulf of Mexico. The area is depleted of oxygen. He says his prediction of more
problems may not come true if a lot of ethanol production is switched to crops
that don’t need much artificial fertilizer.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Fruit Frostbite From Record Lows

Freezing temperatures recently descended on large sections of the country.
Record lows were registered from the south to the plains states. The
prolonged frost means entire crops of fruit and grain could be lost. Adam
Allington reports:

Transcript

Freezing temperatures recently descended on large sections of the country.
Record lows were registered from the South to the Plains states. The
prolonged frost means entire crops of fruit and grain could be lost. Adam
Allington reports:


Paul Peters has 500 acres of apples and peaches in central Missouri. Peters
says above average temperatures during the day and night advanced the
growing season by 2-3 weeks:


“We really didn’t cool down at night; I think probably was more of a concern then
reaching 60-70 degrees in the daytime. One of my partners here said he’d never seen an
apple blossom in March and this year he did.”


But then a week-long frost hit, right when crops were at their most
vulnerable.


Extensive damage has also been reported on crops of winter wheat, grapes
and cherries.


Some farmers will be able to till under failed wheat and alfalfa crops and
substitute corn. However, it may not be that simple since corn seed supplies
are already tight from higher than normal plantings for ethanol production.


For the Environment Report, I’m Adam Allington.

Related Links

Price of Natural Gas Falling

The price of natural gas spiked last fall after Hurricane Katrina knocked out production in the Gulf. But prices have come down substantially since then, and the amount of natural gas in storage is growing. The GLRC’s Erin Toner explains what that could mean for consumers:

Transcript

The price of natural gas spiked last fall after Hurricane Katrina knocked out production
in the Gulf. But prices have come down substantially since then, and the amount of
natural gas in storage is growing. The GLRC’s Erin Toner explains what that could mean
for consumers.


During the summer, natural gas is put into storage for the coming winter.
Because last winter was relatively warm, the amount of gas in storage has grown
to its highest level since the government began collecting data in 1994.


Jim Kendell is director of the Natural Gas Division at the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
He says the buildup of gas in storage will likely mean lower energy bills this winter:


“Unless we have a really hot summer this summer, or unless we have some more hurricanes.”


Kendell says barring those extremes, consumer prices for natural gas in the winter
shouldn’t rise too much from where they are now, meaning prices could be down 20 percent
over last year.


For the GLRC, I’m Erin Toner.

Related Links

Legislation Dividing Organic, Biotech Farmers

  • Organic farms are concerned about nearby farms that produce genetically modified crops. They fear that the genetically modified crops will cross with and alter the genes of their own crops. (Photo by Rene Cerney)

The nation’s agricultural seed companies are fighting local restrictions on their genetically engineered products. They say it’s the federal government’s job to regulate food safety. But critics say federal agencies aren’t doing a good job of testing genetically modified food for safety. They’re backing the right of local governments to regulate genetically engineered crops themselves. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:

Transcript

The nation’s agricultural seed companies are fighting local restrictions on
their genetically engineered products. They say it’s the federal
government’s job to regulate food safety, but critics say federal agencies
aren’t doing a good job of testing genetically modified food for safety.
They’re backing the right of local governments to regulate genetically
engineered crops themselves. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Sarah Hulett reports:


Genetically engineered crops are created when genes from other plants,
animals or bacteria are used to alter their DNA.


Critics call them “Franken-foods,” and two years ago, three California
counties banned farmers from growing genetically altered crops. That
alarmed the agribusiness industry, and now it’s fighting to keep that from
happening elsewhere.


So far, the industry successfully lobbied 14 states to pass laws preventing
their local governments from putting restrictions on engineered crops.
Four other states are considering similar measures.


Jim Byrum is with the Michigan Agri-Business Association.


“Frankly, it’s pretty frustrating for us to look at some of the rumors that
are floating around about what happens with new technology. It’s
reduced pesticide use; it’s reduced producer expense in production. It’s
done all sorts of things.”


Genetically engineered seeds are created in the laboratories of big seed
companies like Monsanto and DuPont. The modified plants can produce
higher-yield crops that make their own insecticides, or tolerate crop-
killing problems such as drought or viruses.


Proponents of the technology say genetically altered crops have the
potential to feed the world more efficiently, and they say it’s better for
the environment. That’s because the crops can be grown with fewer
polluting pesticides, but critics say not enough is known yet about
engineered crops’ long-term ecological impact, or on the health of
people who eat them.


(Sound of farm)


Michelle Lutz is among the skeptics. She and her husband run an 80-
acre organic farm north of Detroit. She’s watching about a dozen head of
the beef cattle she’s raising. They’re feeding on cobs of organic corn
grown several yards away.


“I’m surrounded by conventional farmers. The farmers right over here to
my east – they’re good people, and I don’t think they would intentionally
do anything to jeopardize me, but they are growing genetically modified
corn.”


Lutz worries that pollen from genetically modified corn from those
nearby fields could make its way to her corn plants – and contaminate
her crop by cross-breeding with it. Lutz says people buy produce from
her farm because they trust that it’s free from pesticides, because it’s
locally grown, and because it has not been genetically altered. She says
she shares her customers’ concerns about the safety of engineered foods.


Lutz says letting local governments create zones that don’t allow
genetically engineered crops would protect organic crops from
contamination.


But Jim Byrum of the Michigan Agri-Business Association says no
township or county should be allowed to stop farmers from growing
genetically modified crops. He says every engineered seed variety that’s
on the market is extensively tested by federal agencies.


“Frankly, that evaluation system exists at the federal level. There’s
nothing like that at the state level, and there’s certainly nothing like that
at the local level. We want to have decisions on new technology, new
seed, based on science as opposed to emotion.”


Critics say the federal government’s evaluation of genetically modified
crops is not much more than a rubber stamp. The FDA does not approve
the safety of these crops. That’s just wrong.


Doug Gurian-Sherman is a former advisor on food biotechnology for the
Food and Drug Administration.


“It’s a very cursory process. At the end of it, FDA says we recognize that
you, the company, has assured us that this crop is safe, and remind you
that it’s your responsibility to make sure that’s the case, and the data is
massaged – highly massaged – by the company. They decide what tests
to do, they decide how to do the tests. It’s not a rigorous process.”


Gurian-Sherman says local governments obviously don’t have the
resources to do their own safety testing of engineered foods, but he says
state lawmakers should not allow the future of food to be dictated by
powerful seed companies. He says local governments should be able to
protect their growers and food buyers from the inadequacies of federal
oversight.


For the GLRC, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links