Adult emerald ash borer (Photo by David Cappaert, Michigan State University, courtesy of the Michigan Department of Agriculture)
The emerald ash borer has eaten through
millions of trees in the US and is spreading
west. Erin Toner has more:
Transcript
The emerald ash borer has eaten through
millions of trees in the US and is spreading
west. Erin Toner has more:
For six long years, the tiny metallic-green emerald ash borer has been a killing machine,
starting with millions of ash trees in Michigan and Canada, and then munching its way
into 10 states.
It was recently discovered in Missouri, and now, it’s in Wisconsin.
The prognosis is not good.
Darrell Zastrow is with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
“Our forests are not typically resilient against non-native species and that is true for
the emerald ash borer. It is generally considered to be a poster child for invasive
species.”
Officials in Wisconsin are doing what everyone else has done – restricting the movement
of firewood and telling people how to protect their trees.
Some promising treatments to fight the emerald ash borer are being tested, but so far,
nothing has worked at keeping the insect from spreading west.
Toy makers use phthalates to make hard plastic pliable (Source: Toniht at Wikimedia Commons)
News about dangerous chemicals in toys,
cosmetics and cleaning products has a lot of
Americans spending extra money. People want to
make sure they’re choosing things that are safe
for their families. Julie Grant reports that
other countries are ahead of the US in efforts
to improve the safety of all products:
Transcript
News about dangerous chemicals in toys,
cosmetics and cleaning products has a lot of
Americans spending extra money. People want to
make sure they’re choosing things that are safe
for their families. Julie Grant reports that
other countries are ahead of the US in efforts
to improve the safety of all products:
So you might expect that the government has tested those
chemicals to make sure they’re safe. But you’d be wrong.
Daryl Ditz is senior policy advisor at the Center for
International Environmental Law.
He says the US Environmental Protection Agency has never
assessed the hazards of most chemicals used in every day
products.
“That means the EPA doesn’t know, and you and I don’t know,
which materials on the shelves are more dangerous and
which are less.”
Ditz says only a few hundred chemicals have been
thoroughly tested by the U.S. government, but there are
80,000 chemicals used in products on the market.
In the U.S., the EPA has to prove a chemical is harmful to
keep it off the market.
(sound of toy store)
Dorothy Bryan is shopping at this upscale toy store in Northeast Ohio.
She’s got three grandkids. She’s looking at an
organic cotton bunny, colorful wooden blocks, and of course
Thomas the Tank Engine. She
pays more for toys at this store than she would at the big box
retailer. But Bryan says they’re worth it.
“They’re not toxic. That’s the big part. They’re not the
plastic toxic things.
I purchase usually the wooden toys. The little one puts
everything in his mouth.”
But most kids’ toys are made of plastic. And lots of plastics are made with phthalates. It makes them pliable.
But phthalates are endocrine disruptors. They’re gender-bender chemicals that make girls develop earlier and reduce testosterone levels in boys.
That’s why
California has banned the use some phthalates in toys. So
have Japan and the European Union.
But Daryl Ditz, chemical expert at Center for International
Environmental Law, says regulators in the U.S. don’t have
much power to ban phthalates or other chemicals.
Chemicals here are innocent until proven guilty.
“That is, companies can sell virtually anything in a product or in a barrel unless it’s been proven
to be dangerous.”
But other countries are starting to take the opposite
approach. Ditz says the European Union is rolling out a new
set of laws that make chemicals guilty until proven
innocent.
“They’re putting the responsibility squarely on the shoulders
of the chemical makers. As opposed to having the
environmental authorities look for a needle in the haystack,
they’re saying, ‘this should be the responsibility of the
companies who make these materials.’”
Under the EU law, manufacturers will have to study and
report the risks posed by each chemical: whether they
cause cancer, birth defects, or environmental problems.
The Bush administration and chemical manufacturers tried to
block the European law. But they couldn’t.
Ditz says leaders in the
chemical makers’ trade group are now running around like
their hair is on fire. They’re worried – the costs to comply
could be in the tens of millions of dollars for some
companies that export chemicals to Europe.
But many individual companies have already started to
comply with the law.
Walter van het Hoff is spokesperson for Dow Chemical in
Europe. He says cataloging Dow’s 7000 chemicals is a
huge effort, but they don’t have a choice.
“You need to comply; otherwise you cannot sell them
anymore in the European Union.”
There are a half billion consumers in the EU and Dow wants to keep them. Dow and other
manufacturers might have to reformulate – or even abandon
some chemicals if the EU decides they’re unsafe.
While the U.S. is not considering a comprehensive chemical
review like Europe’s new laws, about 30 states are
considering new regulations on chemicals in toys. The Toy
Industry Association doesn’t want a patchwork of laws, so
it’s called for national toy safety standards.
Lake Superior's South Shore, Wisconsin
(Photo by Dave Hansen, courtesy of the EPA)
There’s a new agreement that says the
Great Lakes water has to stay in the Great Lakes.
It’s been approved now by all eight of the states
and the two Canadian provinces that border the
Lakes. Rick Pluta reports the agreement is now
on its way to Congress:
Transcript
There’s a new agreement that says the
Great Lakes water has to stay in the Great Lakes.
It’s been approved now by all eight of the states
and the two Canadian provinces that border the
Lakes. Rick Pluta reports the agreement is now
on its way to Congress:
The Great Lakes region was worried that drier parts of the country and the world might
be eyeing the largest supply of freshwater on Earth.
Ten years ago, a Canadian company got permission from Ontario to send millions of
gallons of water to Asia via tanker ships. Fierce opposition from around the Great Lakes
region put an end to that project. But regions neighboring the Great Lakes basin still see
them as a possible cure for their water shortages.
Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm says the Great Lakes compact offers an answer to
anyone outside the region who wants to get their hands on that water.
“Can’t touch this. (laughs) That’s what we say. They need to look at their own way of
preserving and managing their resources.”
When Granholm signed new laws in a ceremony here on the Lake Michigan shoreline,
Michigan became the last of the eight Great Lakes states to formally join the compact.
The compact was put together by leaders of the US states and two Canadian provinces
that border the lakes. Granholm says, once it’s adopted by Congress and signed by the
president, it will give the Great Lakes states new authority to protect their water.
“This allows me as governor to veto any large diversion of water, so we can put a stop to
it ourselves. It really allows us the autonomy of protecting these Great Lakes overall.”
It took 10 years for the Great Lakes states to get the compact through their legislatures
and signed by their governors. Members of Congress from the region are hoping it won’t
take quite so long to get it to the president’s desk.
Chicago Congressman Rahm Emanuel is expected to lead the effort to get the compact
through the US House. He says congressional hearings will begin this year and the
compact should be approved in time for it to be sent to the new president in early 2009.
Emanuel says he’s not expecting any problems.
“Because people understand and know, this is our Yellowstone Park, this is our Grand
Canyon. This is a national treasure. There’s been a lot of work and years of effort to get
this done. The good news is a lot of the chairmen of the committees that are relevant, come
from the Midwest, know how important the Great Lakes are and will act with due speed
in getting it done.”
Both the Republican presidential candidate John McCain and Democratic candidate
Barak Obama have said they would sign the compact.
Environmental groups are among those backing the deal. But many of them say it
still comes up short because it does not stop bottled water from leaving the Great Lakes
region.
Cyndi Roper is with Clean Water Action.
“Water is water. You can’t fill a tanker with water and take it out of the Great Lakes, but
you can fill that same tanker with bottles of water and ship them to other parts of the
country and other parts of the world, and we believe as we move forward, that’s a very
dangerous precedent to set.”
She says that’s because many millions of gallons can still trickle out of the lakes – even if
it’s 12 ounces at a time.
Wetlands, such as these in Michigan, have decreased, according to a report on the country's ecosystems (Photo by David Kenyon of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources)
A new report about the state of the nation’s ecosystems was recently released. And the results are so-so. Jennifer Guerra has the details:
Transcript
A new report about the state of the nation’s ecosystems was recently released. And the results are so-so. Jennifer Guerra has the details:
Think of the report as the environmental equivalent of an annual physical exam.
Here are the results: the number of wetlands in the country is down and virtually every stream contains contaminants. On the plus side, it looks like soil erosion has decreased. And farmers are able to produce more food on less land.
Robin O’Malley plans to take those results to federal lawmakers. O’Malley is with the Heinz Center. It’s the non-partisan think tank responsible for the report.
“In the same way the chairmen of the federal reserve comes up and reports to congress about how our nation’s economy is doing, we think we need to do that kind of thing at a national scale for the environment.”
In addition to the report, the Heinz Center also included a little roadmap of sorts to help the lawmakers along.
The creation of 'green-collar' jobs may help the Rust Belt's unemployment problems (Photo by Lester Graham)
The nation’s economy is in decline, and
the middle states that make up the Rust Belt have
been hit particularly hard with job losses. Some
Midwest states have turned to a new type of
manufacturing and the so-called green collar jobs
it creates. Marianne Holland reports:
Transcript
The nation’s economy is in decline, and
the middle states that make up the Rust Belt have
been hit particularly hard with job losses. Some
Midwest states have turned to a new type of
manufacturing and the so-called green collar jobs
it creates. Marianne Holland reports:
Nationwide, just over half the states have passed some sort of laws or incentives geared at
getting green manufacturing jobs. In the nation’s rust belt,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois and Ohio already have green policy in place.
Ron Pernick is a co-founder of CleanEdge. That’s a national green manufacturing research
organization. Pernick says those jobs, are in one of the major growth sectors in American
manufacturing. They’re growing at a rate of about 30% each year. In Iowa, property tax abatements are given to green manufacturing. In Illinois, the state has passed laws requiring utilities to get a portion of their energy from wind or solar power. Pernick says public policy translates to more jobs.
“If you think about creating new industry, you can’t export development. You’ve got to
hire local people to put in the wind turbines, to install the solar farms, to put solar on top
of rooftops. And those jobs can never be exported.”
But other states have been slow to change policy to embrace green manufacturing. In Michigan, green energy legislation has been tied up in
the State Senate. An in states like Indiana, there are no laws or business incentives even on the table to attract the green
manufacturing industry.
Indiana State Representative Ryan Dvorak blames the big power companies for lobbying against incentives to create green jobs.
“I’m not sure why they have so much sway in the state with the different legislators but
they don’t want to give up any ground basically. Obviously they make their money by
generating and selling electricity, so any loss in market share, they’re motivated to
stop that legislation.”
The power companies say they’re just looking out for their customers.
Angeline Protegere is a spokesperson for Duke Energy. Protegere says renewable energy is
moving forward without state regulations. She says Duke understands that some day
regulations will come. But she says that will be at a high risk.
“We constantly have to balance our environmental responsibilities with our economic
responsibilities to our customers because they pay for the cost of pollution control
through their bills.”
And the power companies’ lobbyists persuade legislators it’s in the best interests of the people to block incentives for green jobs. Representative Dvorak thinks his colleagues are being misled.
Jesse Kharbanda is with the Hoosier Environmental Council. He says in his state and others that ignore the green jobs opportunity, workers are being left behind.
“We’re obviously in this situation where Indiana has historically had a formidable
manufacturing base and that base has been continuously eroded because of globalization.
We’re not in any time going to fundamentally change Indiana’s economy and so we have
to deal with the labor force as it is. We have a good, technically minded labor base, but
the question is: what sectors are we creating in the state to employ that technical labor
base. And one of them ought to be the green technology sector.”
Kharbanda says it’s a state’s public policy, tax breaks, and other incentives that will attract the
most green collar jobs. Without those incentives, unemployed factory workers in Rust Belt
states will have to hope for some kind of recovery in manufacturing, or take lower paying, service sector jobs.
The Tehachapi Wind Farm in California. The turbines produce enough electricity to meet the needs of 350,000 people each year (Photo courtesy of the Department Energy)
Large wind turbines are popping up all over
the United States. But some homeowners are beginning
to put up their own backyard wind turbines. Lester
Graham reports:
Transcript
Large wind turbines are popping up all over
the United States. But some homeowners are beginning
to put up their own backyard wind turbines. Lester
Graham reports:
Dozens of companies are popping up, making these smaller wind generators.
Southwest Windpower is one of the older manufacturers.
Andy Kruse is a Vice President there.
He says these smaller wind turbines can supply power for houses on the grid; maybe
even enough to sell some electricity back to the power company. But some states
haven’t passed the laws necessary to require power companies to allow the turbines to
be hooked up to the grid.
“States that have yet to do that, you know, they have to question it. I mean, some of
them have never even heard something like this either for solar or for wind, so it’s a
learning curve for them.”
Kruse says home-grown wind power is starting to catch on, with thousands of people
asking about getting their own small wind turbine put up in their backyard.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Map of the Great Lakes, the basin, and the 8 connecting states. (Photo courtesy of Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, NOAA)
The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Compact is an
agreement to stop shipping water out of the Great Lakes
basin. But all eight Great Lakes states and Congress
must approve it first. Lester Graham talked with Peter
Annin, the author of the book “The Great Lakes Water
Wars.” Annin says some of the states have been reluctant
to approve the treaty because Michigan has an image of saying
‘no’ to water requests from other states while putting
almost no water restrictions on its own towns and businesses:
Transcript
The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Compact is an
agreement to stop shipping water out of the Great Lakes
basin. But all eight Great Lakes states and Congress
must approve it first. Lester Graham talked with Peter
Annin, the author of the book “The Great Lakes Water
Wars.” Annin says some of the states have been reluctant
to approve the treaty because Michigan has an image of saying
‘no’ to water requests from other states while putting
almost no water restrictions on its own towns and businesses:
Peter Annin: “Michigan has been a laggard in monitoring and regulating its own domestic water
use. And so it’s seen by some other states as being somewhat hypocritical in the water debate.
For example, Minnesota, which is the most progressive domestically, if you’re going to withdraw
water from the Great Lakes at 10,000 gallons a day or more, you have to get a permit. In the state
of Michigan you can go up to 5 million gallons of water withdrawn from Lake Michigan per day
before you have to get a permit. 10,000 gallons in Minnesota, 5 million gallons in Michigan, and
this is what is causing tension between Michigan and some of the other Great Lakes states.”
Lester Graham: “Lets assume that all 8 Great Lakes states do pass this within the next year or
two, Congress then has to pass it – and many of the members of Congress are in those thirsty
Southwestern states. What happens then?”
Annin: “Yeah, that’s a really good point. We have to remember that the compact is just a piece of
paper until it passes all 8 Great Lakes legislatures and then is adopted by Congress. And there
are a lot of concerns among the general public, given that we have these dry-land states that have
a lot of problems with water perhaps opposing the Great Lakes compact. I’m not so certain that
that’s going to be an issue, because those states also have a lot federal water projects that come
up for renewal all the time that require the Great Lakes Congressmen to sign off on. And I’m not
sure they’re in a position, given how precious and important water is for them to survive on a daily
basis down there, that they’re really that interested in getting into a water fight with the Senators
and Congressmen in the Great Lakes basin. But, we’ll see.”
Graham: “I’ve looked at different models for getting Great Lakes water down to the Southwest,
and economically, they just don’t seem feasible. It would be incredibly expensive to try to get
Great Lakes water to the Southwest states, yet, State Legislators say again and again ‘oh no,
they have a plan, they know how it will happen.’ And as water becomes more valuable, they could
make it happen. How likely is it that there would be a canal or pipe and pumping stations built to
divert Great Lakes water, if this compact doesn’t pass?”
Annin: “It looks highly unlikely today, for the reasons that you just mentioned. It takes an
extraordinary amount of money to send water uphill, which is what would be to the West, and we’d
certainly have to cross mountain ranges if you’re even going to send it a shorter distance, to the
Southeast. To the point where it would be cheaper for many of these places to, even though it’s
expensive, to desalinate water from the ocean and then send it to inland places. But, you know, a
lot of water experts in the United States say ‘never say never’, because the value of fresh, potable
water is probably going to skyrocket in this century. We’re leaving the century of oil; we’re entering
the century of water. But, for right now, you’re absolutely right, it is extraordinary cost-prohibitive.
But let me say one other footnote here, it’s hard to find a federal water project in this country that
actually made economic sense.”
Color satellite photo produced from NOAA-14 AVHRR satellite imagery. (Photo courtesy of Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, NOAA)
A delay in the approval of the Great Lakes water
diversion compact might be ending. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
A delay in the approval of the Great Lakes Water
Diversion Compact might be ending. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The compact, agreed to by eight Great Lakes Governors and Canadian Provincial Leaders, aims
to discourage other areas from seeking Great Lakes water. Four states have ratified the
agreement. But various disputes in Wisconsin over water conservation and getting water to
communities that straddle the Great Lakes basin delayed the compact there.
A new, bipartisan deal apparently headed to approval in the Wisconsin legislature pleases the
Council of Great Lakes Governors, and its executive director Dave Naftzger.
“This could really be the tipping point that pushes the region over the edge and enables the deal
to finally get done so this region can take the finalized compact to Washington for final approval.’’
Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania are the other states still working on ratifying the Great Lakes
Water Diversion Compact.
Scientific data indicate lower Great Lakes water levels might be because of global
warming. But, Lester Graham reports many people believe the lower levels are
because of water withdrawals:
Transcript
Scientific data indicate lower Great Lakes water levels might be because of global
warming. But, Lester Graham reports many people believe the lower levels are
because of water withdrawals:
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Great Lakes Environmental
Research Lab has been investigating the lower water levels on the Great Lakes for
several years now. They’ve recorded less snow pack to replenish the lakes, and
less ice cover to prevent evaporation during the winter. That’s corresponded with the
lower lake levels.
The inference is climate change – or global warming – is causing the Great Lakes to
lose water. But many residents in the Great Lakes region are convinced the water is
being piped away, either by industry or diverted to Western states.
Most of the water diversions in the Lakes have been around for a century and are
well-monitored. But, some politicians play on fears that the lower lake levels are part
of a grand conspiracy to steal Great Lakes water for more politically powerful states
in drier regions.
For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
A year ago, governors of all eight Great Lakes states endorsed a
multi-state compact to protect the lakes against plans to pump water out of
the basin. Bill Cohen reports… a full year later, not one state legislature
has actually approved the compact:
Transcript
A year ago, governors of all eight Great Lakes states endorsed a multi-state compact
to protect the
lakes against plans to pump water out of the basin. Bill Cohen reports… a full year
later, not one
state legislature has actually approved the compact:
Most states haven’t even gotten one of their legislative chambers to okay the
compact. Most
people think the compact is to protect against shipping millions of gallons of water
to foreign
countries, but the biggest roadblock has been the fear that each state would be
giving up the right
to allow water diversions for its own cities and industries.
Molly Flannagan with the National Wildlife Federation says environmental activists
are not giving
up. She says 2006 has been a year to educate lawmakers:
“We had four states that had legislation introduced this year. We’re expecting to
have more states
introducing legislation next year. I think this is the year really of building
momentum towards
getting the compact done, hopefully in 2007 or 2008.”
Backers of the plan are also seeking approval from Quebec and Ontario.
Adult emerald ash borer (Photo by David Cappaert, Michigan State University, courtesy of the Michigan Department of Agriculture)
