Some states have shovel-ready rail projects, but others states are just in the planning stage. Here is a high-speed train in Taiwan.
(Photo source: Jiang at Wikimedia Commons)
Today, August 24, is a deadline for
states competing for eight billion
dollars in federal stimulus money
for higher speed rail. Shawn Allee reports, this stimulus could
run in slow-motion:
Transcript
Today, August 24, is a deadline for
states competing for eight billion
dollars in federal stimulus money
for higher speed rail. Shawn Allee reports, this stimulus could
run in slow-motion:
Federal Railroad Administration staff are staying late tonight – August 24 – to accept hundreds of applications for higher-speed rail funds.
FRA spokesperson Rob Kulat says the agency wants to give out stimulus money quickly, but, just in case, it’s announced there might be two rounds of applications – not just one.
“It would be a delay, but the idea is to have successful projects, to have them work cost-effectively. If a state isn’t ready financially or technically to implement their plan, then they need to go back to the drawing board a bit. We’re not going to throw good money after bad.”
Kulat says some states have shovel-ready rail projects, but others states are just in the planning stage.
It could be years before they clear the track for faster trains.
Colorado Springs pumps water through the Rocky Mountains into town (Photo courtesy of the Colorado Springs Convention and Visitors Bureau)
Out West, a lot of cities figure many more people will be moving in over the next few decades. Water engineers wish those people would bring along all the water they’ll need, but of course they won’t. Shawn Allee reports these cities want to pipe more water from far away, and some people think that’s a bad idea:
Transcript
Out West, a lot of cities figure many more people will be moving in over the next few
decades. Water engineers wish those people would bring along all the water they’ll
need, but of course they won’t. Shawn Allee reports these cities want to pipe more
water from far away, and some people think that’s a bad idea:
The air in Colorado Springs is usually so dry it quickly chaps your lips.
What gives? Colorado Springs sounds wet enough.
“There’re really no springs in Colorado Springs, so when you start talking
about water, it’s a divergence between our name and reality. Sounds like we
had a lot, and in reality we didn’t.”
This is Matt Mayberry, Colorado Spring’s historian.
I’ve heard about this massive water pipeline project the town’s cooking up, and I was
curious just how long the city’s worked to quench its thirst.
Mayberry’s got an exhaustive book on that with an exhaustive title.
“Blah, blah, blah … the emergence and appropriation of rights in Colorado
Springs.”
The crib notes version?
Early on, buffalo manure poisoned Colorado Spring’s creek, so people dug wells.
Then, the wells got infested with grasshoppers.
And the town grew, and grew, and grew again.
“Very soon you had to bring water from further away, and ultimately to the
Western Slope which is a couple hours drive of here.”
Today, Colorado Springs pipes water through the Rocky Mountain range.
Doing the extraordinary for water is kinda ordinary for Colorado Springs.
Its latest pipeline project is called the Southern Delivery System, and it’ll pump nearly
80 million gallons into town each year – and it’ll pump that water forty five miles –
completely uphill.
Impressive, but some people are asking tough questions about it.
“Our concern with this project is the greenhouse gas emissions that it would
contribute to.”
Stacy Tellinghuisen is with Western Resource Advocates, a Colorado environmental
group.
She says there’s a connection between pumping water uphill and a large carbon
footprint.
“Water is heavy. Pumping it over a great distance takes a lot of energy, and
in the process it would require something along the lines of 60 MW of power,
which is about a tenth of a power plant.”
And, for the most part, the utility burns natural gas and coal to generate power. Both
emit carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.
Tellinghuisen says Western cities are considering at least five other water pipeline
projects, some with even larger carbon footprints.
She wants Colorado Springs to set an example by using dedicated low-carbon sources
like wind power for its water pumps.
I ask the Colorado Springs Utilities about that.
Keith Riley helped plan the Southern Delivery System.
“We think there are some ways we can minimize the carbon footprint by
looking at some new technologies.”
Riley says there were lots of environmental regulations to wade through before the
Southern Delivery System got approved.
But a large carbon footprint doesn’t disqualify utility projects.
Riley says, even if carbon were considered, the project might have gone forward
anyway because the city’s expected to grow over the next few decades.
“Water is the essential element for all of us, so when it comes to that level of
sustaining our own lives, then you get to some trade-offs on what we’re
willing to do to keep ourselves alive where we we live, where our cities are.
No matter what happens, we’ve got to move water to Colorado Springs, and
we’re uphill from the river, so we’ve got to get the water uphill one way or
another.”
Riley says Colorado Springs Utilities is considering low-carbon renewable power for its
new pipeline.
But it’ll be expensive, and no one’s stepped forward with all the money.
Other Western cities are engineering clever ways of moving loads of water around,
too. And it’ll be a political and financial challenge for them to pay for the carbon
footprint.
California is seeking to ban Styrofoam carry-out containers (Photo by Renee Comet, courtesy of the National Cancer Institute)
This week, one state is voting on a bill that would make it illegal for restaurants to serve takeout food in Styrofoam. Rebecca Williams has more:
Transcript
This week, one state is voting on a bill that would make it illegal for restaurants to serve takeout food in styrofoam. Rebecca Williams has more:
A number of cities have banned Styrofoam food containers – including San Francisco, Seattle and Portland. And now California lawmakers are deciding whether to ban the containers.
The bill says styrofoam is a big litter problem. And animals can choke on pieces of it.
The World Health Organization’s cancer research agency says styrene is a possible human carcinogen. Styrene is the stuff styrofoam’s made out of.
Jerry Hill is the Assembly member who introduced the bill in California. He says the American Chemistry Council and other groups are making it hard for him to get the votes he needs.
“You would think the world was going to come to an end if we were to prohibit and ban Styrofoam. It’s an industry that whether you look at the chemical industry, the restaurant industry that’s opposing it, and they are very vocal and very powerful.”
The opponents say there’s no reason for the ban, and they say it would be bad for the economy.
Yucca Mountain is the nation's planned repository for spent nuclear fuel (Photo courtesy of the US Department of Energy)
Politically speaking, America’s nuclear waste storage policy is a mess. Hazardous spent nuclear fuel is supposed to be buried under Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, but after two decades – it’s not finished. Congress pushed the project onto Nevada in the 80s by passing what’s known as the “Screw Nevada Bill.” Shawn Allee met a man who regrets helping put nuclear waste at Nevada’s doorstep:
Transcript
Politically speaking, America’s nuclear waste storage policy is a mess. Hazardous spent nuclear fuel is supposed to be buried under Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, but after two decades – it’s not finished. Congress pushed the project onto Nevada in the 80s by passing what’s known as the “Screw Nevada Bill.” Shawn Allee met a man who regrets helping put nuclear waste at Nevada’s doorstep:
For twenty years Nevada’s tried to scuttle Yucca Mountain.
Along the way, it’s hired Robert Halstead to create a plan to soften the blow if it loses. He’s an expert on nuclear waste truck and rail transportation.
“My job would be to craft the safest, or least-bad, transportation system so that if Nevada got stuck with a repository they would at least have some control of the transportation system because the activity that most likely to injures people and the environment is transportation.”
Halstead didn’t start his nuclear career on Nevada’s side, though. Thirty years ago, he worked for Wisconsin. He says the federal government wanted states’ help in storing nuclear waste deep underground.
In 1982 Congress came to consensus about how to test sites. He trusted it – and built political support for it.
“There was a clear statement that safety was not enough and economic efficiency was not enough. You also had to deal with regional equity.”
The gist was that there’d be at least two nuclear waste repositories: one in the West, and one in the East.
“We were pretty optimistic. Unfortunately that all began to fall apart very quickly.”
Congressmen and even the public started getting cold feet about the site selection process.
There were rowdy protests, especially in states that may have had the right geology for a repository. That included Wisconsin.
“If there was an objective approach to picking the sites, we knew that we would be in the first tier of the sites that would be evaluated.”
After a few years, Eastern politicians got frantic.
“They asked for a fix.”
Halstead decided to help with this fix, because he’d lost faith in the system, too. He says he helped cut legislative deals to stop the nuclear waste law he’d supported just a few years earlier.
It worked.
In 1987, Congress ended the government’s search for a nuclear waste repository.
Yucca would be the only candidate.
“This law was written very carefully to ensure that Nevada got screwed. And you know what, it chilled my blood.”
Halstead realized he’d passed a law that broke that early consensus about regional equity.
He was disappointed, and nearly dumped nuclear politics, but then he got a call. It was from a chief nuclear official in Nevada.
“He said aren’t you ashamed of yourself? I would really like you to come out here and help us. And I said to him, ‘I’d just got done getting Wisconsin getting off the hook and if I help you get off the hook, I think it’s likely that they’ll have to come back to Wisconsin.’”
But Halstead took the job.
I’ve asked him why several times. Sometimes he’s said guilt. Sometimes, regret. Sometimes, for a job.
Right now, Congress is considering cutting Yucca Mountain’s budget, and President Obama says he’s against the project.
But the law to make Yucca the only choice is still on the books.
I ask Robert Halstead whether that will change. He’s not sure – it’ll be tough to build a new consensus even close to what he saw thirty years ago.
“If nuclear waste disposal in a repository were safe and profitable, someone would have taken it away from Nevada years ago, so there won’t be an amicable ending to this story.”
Brook Wilke and his son, Charlie, visit a test
farm at The Kellogg Biological Research Station. Wilke
and other researchers are testing how well perennial
versions of popular grain crops, such as wheat, will
grow in Michigan. The test farm isn't too far from Battle
Creek, the home of the commercial breakfast cereal industry. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
John Edgerton is a part-time farmer who's growing
test plots of perennial wheat on his Michigan farm. He's
interested in whether the plants might allow sheep to graze
a field after harvest, but still produce for years afterward. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
If you had a bowl of cereal or maybe a muffin this morning, you ate flour from an annual crop. They grow one season, they die, then get re-planted again the next year. Sounds as natural as could be, but repetitive planting can wear out farmland. It can cause soil erosion and cause more water pollution. Now, some scientists are trying to coax grain crops into growing for years at a time. Shawn Allee visited researchers who are testing perennial wheat in the heart of cereal country:
Transcript
If you had a bowl of cereal or maybe a muffin this morning, you ate flour from an annual crop. They grow one season, they die, then get re-planted again the next year. Sounds as natural as could be, but repetitive planting can wear out farmland. It can cause soil erosion and cause more water pollution. Now, some scientists are trying to coax grain crops into growing for years at a time. Shawn Allee visited researchers who are testing perennial wheat in the heart of cereal country:
I’ve headed to a test farm run by Michigan State University. It’s not that
far from Battle Creek,
Michigan where cereal companies like Kelloggs got started.
Dr. Sieg Snapp shows me grain that might make into our cereal bowls
someday.
Allee: “What are we looking at on this side?”
Snapp: “We have 6 varieties of perennial wheat.”
Right now, they kinda look like spindly blades of grass. But in some ways,
this is miraculous; regular
wheat dies after harvest. These have been harvested, and now they’re
popping back up.
“We’ll harvest these this summer, and then in the fall, they’ll re-grow.
They build a deep root
system, and they’re able to come back. So, at first, they start off very
similar, but they keep
growing longer, and they re-grow after harvest. That’s the real
difference.”
Actually, that’s just the start of the difference between annual grains
like wheat and perennial
varieties.
Dr. Snapp says when farmers plant most annual grain crops, soil gets torn
up again and again from
planting and replanting. Rain can wash away exposed top-soil.
Perennial crops get planted once every few years, so they might hold soil
and they might need less
fertilizer that runs off into streams and rivers.
Snapp: “So, the roots of traditional crops including annual wheat are
usually 1-2 feet. These
root systems might be down 6 feet. They can use fertilizers more
efficiently, so they can pick
it up from deep and then move it up where we want it, into the grain.”
Allee: “And if the roots are deep enough, you might need less herbicide
to kill weeds, right?
If that perennial wheat comes up strong enough, it’s already out-competing
the weeds that
are next to it?”
Snapp: “Right, and each year it should do it better for a couple years at
least, we don’t know
how long.”
Dr. Snapp and her colleagues use the word “maybe” a lot when they talk
about perennial grains. It’s
mostly because testing these crops is slow work. That’s one reason they’re
letting some farmers run
their own small tests.
She introduces me to one farmer.
“Hi John! Come on over!”
Part-time farmer and teacher John Edgerton says he checked his test batches
recently.
“I didn’t know what to expect and I went out there and low and behold,
it’s greening up
beautifully. In fact, now, it may be a little too thick. We’ll see.”
Edgerton wants to know whether sheep can get cheap feed from leftover wheat
grass, or whether
farmers could save on tractor fuel.
“One farmer said to me, you know, if I could get three or four years of a
decent crop of
perennial wheat without having to plow, there’d be enormous savings.”
Pretty soon, another perennial wheat researcher joins us in the test field.
He’s Brook Wilke.
He tells me, all this work on perennial wheat and other grains will work
best if the final product, the
grain, tastes like what we’re used to.
Allee: “I hear you baked some chocolate chip cookies with perennial
wheat.”
Wilke: “Yeah. A big component of this work is, “’will people eat the
perennial wheat?’”
Dr. Snapp tasted Wilke’s cookies. She says the wheat tasted kinda nutty,
but good.
Dr. Snapp says maybe one day, she and other researchers will prove
perennial grain plants can thrive.
After that, maybe bread or cereal companies, like Kellogs, will run
taste-tests of their own.
In some states, there are plans for a wolf hunting season (Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
Some states plan to let people hunt wolves. Rebecca Williams reports that’s happening because the US government is taking gray wolves off the federal endangered species list in two places:
Transcript
Some states plan to let people hunt wolves. Rebecca Williams reports that’s happening because the US government is taking gray wolves off the federal endangered species list in two places:
This decision means states in the western Great Lakes and several Rocky Mountain states will have control over wolves.
Some states are calling wolves a protected nongame species.
For example in Michigan, a wolf can only be killed if it’s attacking people, pets or livestock. But in other states – like Idaho and Montana – there are plans for a hunting season for wolves.
Jonathan Lovvorn is chief counsel for the Humane Society of the United States. His group and several others are planning to sue.
“Essentially what we’re worried about is that this is basically going to be a declaration of open season on animals that have been protected for decades.”
The federal decision to take wolves off the endangered species list could be overturned in court. That happened last fall.
If the decision sticks, then the Fish and Wildlife Service will be keeping an eye on wolf populations for at least the next five years.
Because of the down economy, ridership is up. But with the economy flagging, transit companies are having to cut routes and raise fares.
(Photo by Shawn Allee)
So with the government’s 787 billion dollar stimulus plan now approved, a lot of folks in state and local government are thinking about the federal dollars that’ll float their way soon. Some mayors are especially eyeing the 8.4 billion for public transit. Rene Gutel looks at who wants to spend what:
Transcript
So with the government’s 787 billion dollar stimulus plan now approved, a lot of folks in state and local government are thinking about the federal dollars that’ll float their way soon. Some mayors are especially eyeing the 8.4 billion for public transit. Rene Gutel looks at who wants to spend what:
Mayors from coast to coast see the stimulus package as one big pot of gold. Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon knows exactly how he’d like transit money spent in his city.
“First and foremost, Light rail.”
(sound of a train)
It’s all about light rail. Phoenix is notorious for its car-culture, freeways and gridlock; Residents worry it’s turning into the next L.A., but a brand new twenty-mile light rail line launched in December.
Trouble is, it’s only one line. It goes from the suburb of Mesa and ends in downtown Phoenix.
Mayor Gordon wants to use federal stimulus money to add a three-mile extension. Gordon says it’s the ultimate shovel-ready project. All planned, just add 250-million dollars and it’s ready to go.
“We could sign a contract with America, with the federal government, that we will turn dirt by March 31st, and we’ll create 7,000 new jobs.”
Those new jobs will be around long enough at least to get the rail extension built. But getting a light rail line is not the same as keeping it running.
Look at San Francisco that has a well developed transit system. They have a different kind of wish list that centers on maintaining the system they already have.
Judson True is a spokesman for the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.
“We want to repair light rail vehicles that have been damaged in collisions, we have some cable car kiosks that we’d like to replace, we have change machines we’d like to replace in our metro subway stations.”
And it keeps on going. The American Public Transportation Association has identified nearly 800 public transit projects nationwide ready-to-go within 90 days.
APTA says the projects will not only create hundreds of thousands of jobs, but reduce fuel consumption and decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
But San Francisco’s Judson True says, while he’s grateful for funding for capitol projects…
“Systems like ours in San Francisco also need help on the operating side, and you see that all over the country.”
People are calling it the transit paradox and it’s hit cities like Denver, St. Louis and New York City.
Because of the down economy, ridership is up. And yet most transit systems rely on local and state money to subsidize operations. But with the economy flagging, cities and states are struggling too – and transit companies are having to cut routes and raise fares.
“You have a catch 22, more riders and you have to make service cuts.”
That’s Aaron Golub, an assistant professor in the School of Planning at Arizona State University. Mass transit’s his specialty. He’s worried about transit systems getting gleaming new buses, and kiosks, and buildings but then not having the means to operate them.
“It would be quite ironic if, for example, Phoenix were able to afford a light rail extension while cutting back on light rail service at the same time. Or the worst case, opening a light rail extension and not being able to operate it at all.”
Golub points to studies that say you create more jobs by investing in current transit operations – not capitol projects.
But many mayors across the nation feel light rail and other mass transit is an investment in their future. They’re ready to take on those shovel ready projects now with the hope that it’ll kick start the economy now and by the time the routes are finished, we’ll be out of the recession.
Obama delivering the American Recovery and Reinvestment speech on Thursday, January 8, 2009 (Photo courtesy of the Obama Transition Team)
One group wants part of the economic stimulus package to plug up some leaks. It says old toilets and leaky water pipes below city streets are wasting water. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
One group wants part of the economic stimulus package to plug up some leaks. It says old toilets and leaky water pipes below city streets are wasting water. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The group is called the Alliance for Water Efficiency. It’s made up of plumbing manufacturers, contractors, city water systems, and enviromental groups.
They want about ten billion dollars of the economic stimulus package to go to shovel-ready projects that conserve water.
Alliance board member Susan Stratton says the work could include everything from century-old city water pipes to replacing many older, water-wasting toilets in private homes.
“This requires the skills of a plumber and it requires retailers and wholesalers to deliver products. These are things we know how to do. There are people in the work environment who have these skills and can ramp up pretty quickly.”
Stratton says cutting water use would also save energy by reducing power use at water utilities.
The partnering states want to reduce the amount greenhouse gases coming from car tailpipes. (Photo by Ben VonWaggoner)
Eleven Northeastern states are working together to create a new fuel standard that will mean lower greenhouse gases.
Julie Grant reports that means, when you fill up your car in those states, the gas won’t be quite as bad for the environment:
Transcript
Eleven Northeastern states are working together to create a new fuel standard that will mean lower greenhouse gases.
Julie Grant reports that means, when you fill up your car in those states, the gas won’t be quite as bad for the environment:
The partnering states want to reduce the amount greenhouse gases coming from car tailpipes.
Ian Bowles is Secretary of Energy with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
He says the states would prefer that the federal government take the lead on this issue, but they’re doing what they can to limit carbon emissions from cars and trucks as soon as possible.
“If everyone waits and sits on their hands until there’s a global agreement, it’s going to take a long time to get anything done.”
Bowles expects the eleven-state agreement to spur investment into new types of ethanol and biofuels. And he says that will mean new jobs in science, engineering, and at fuel refineries.
“We’ll be creating a much bigger market for biofuels. Jobs will get created and greenhouse gasses will be cut.”
The states expect to have a legally binding agreement on the low carbon fuel standard by the end of the year.
Governors in New England are up in arms about some changes the Bush administrations
wants to make that would allow older power plants to add on but avoid buying new
pollution control equipment. Mark Brush has more:
Transcript
Governors in New England are up in arms about some changes the Bush administrations
wants to make that would allow older power plants to add on but avoid buying new
pollution control equipment. Mark Brush has more:
The proposed rule change would change how air pollution is measured from power plants
that expand their operations.
Right now, the air pollution is capped at a certain amount
per year. The new rule would cap the amount of air pollution allowed by the hour.
That
means a power plant could put out a lot more air pollution over the course of a year.
John Walke is a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. He says
this little change in the rule could have a big impact.
“So as soon as these utility companies began to expand their plants and to pump out more
smog and soot pollution. People in surrounding communities would see their air quality
worsen.”
Six northeastern states are urging the EPA not to go forward with the rule change. In a
recent letter sent to the EPA they say the rule change – quote “threatens the quality of our
states’ air and the health of our citizens.”
Some states have shovel-ready rail projects, but others states are just in the planning stage. Here is a high-speed train in Taiwan. (Photo source: Jiang at Wikimedia Commons)
