Mercedez-Benz A-Class F-Cell at the 2009 Washington DC Auto Show (Photo source: IFCAR at Wikimedia Commons)
The Department of Energy wants to cut funding for the development of hydrogen powered vehicles. Mark Brush reports the Energy Secretary has decided that cars powered by hydrogen are too far off:
Transcript
The Department of Energy wants to cut funding for the development of hydrogen powered vehicles. Mark Brush reports the Energy Secretary has decided that cars powered by hydrogen are too far off:
Six years ago, President George W. Bush proposed spending 1.2 billion dollars to develop hydrogen power cars.
Now, Stephen Chu, President Obama’s Energy Secretary, says hydrogen powered cars aren’t yet practical for today’s market.
Chu says they’d rather spend money on things like plug-in cars and cars powered by biofuels. Things that can hit the road now instead of 20 years from now.
People working on hydrogen powered vehicles aren’t too happy about the cuts.
Patrick Serfass is with the National Hydrogen Association.
“I’d say the hydrogen industry is perplexed. The administration has a lot of smart people in it and they have done a lot of great things for many parts of the renewable energy sector. But the proposal to eliminate the hydrogen vehicle program is a mistake.”
Serfass says hydrogen powered cars are not as far off as the Energy Secretary might think. He and his group are trying to persuade members of Congress to put research money back into the budget.
A newly dug drainage tile. These underground pipes keep the fields dry, but they're also a pathway for nitrogen fertilizers. (photo by Mark Brush)
Today, we begin a week-long series on pollution in the heartland.
Storm water runoff from farm fields contaminates the lakes that many cities use for drinking water. But rather than making farmers reduce the pollution, the government requires water utilities to clean it up and pass the cost on to their customers. In the first part of our series, the GLRC’s Lester Graham reports on efforts some communities have made to stop the pollution at the source:
Transcript
Today, we begin a week-long series on pollution in the heartland. Storm water runoff from farm
fields contaminates the lakes that many cities use for drinking water. But rather than making
farmers reduce the pollution, the government requires water utilities to clean it up and pass the
cost on to their customers. In the first part of our series, the GLRC’s Lester Graham reports on
efforts some communities have made to stop the pollution at the source:
To a great extent, nitrogen fertilizer determines how big a corn crop will be. But often, farmers
use more nitrogen than they really need. It’s a bit of a wager. If conditions are just right, that
extra nitrogen can sometimes pay off in more bushels of corn. But just as often the extra nitrogen
ends up being washed away by rain.
That nitrogen can get into lakes that are used for public drinking supplies. If nitrate levels get too
high the nitrogen can displace oxygen in the blood of children under six months old. It’s called
‘blue baby syndrome.’ In extreme cases it can cause death.
Keith Alexander is the Director of Water Management for the city of Decatur, Illinois. He recalls
that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency required his city to give families with babies
bottled water because nitrogen levels exceeded the federal limits.
“For approximately six years, while we went through the motions of determining what was best
for our community, we did issue bottled water on an infrequent basis when the nitrate levels did
indeed elevate.”
The City of Decatur had to get nitrate levels down. So, they piggy-backed on federal and state
incentives offered to farmers to use better management practices. The city gave farmers money
to build terraces to reduce soil erosion. It gave money on top of federal and state tax dollars to
farmers to put in grass waterways to slow water rushing off the fields. The city gave farmers
money on top of federal and state incentives to use conservation tillage methods. They offered to
pay to install artificial wetlands so plants would take up the nitrogen before it got into the public
water supplies. It gave farmers money to use a chemical that help stabilize nitrogen in the soil.
With all that city and state and federal money offered to farmers, was it enough to reduce nitrogen
to safe levels?
“Unfortunately, no.”
Keith Alexander says some farmers did take advantage of the incentives. But not enough of
them.
“We’ve done quite a bit on a voluntary basis with a lot of great cooperation from the agricultural
community, but in spite of all that, we would still at times have elevated nitrate levels in Lake
Decatur.”
The city had to build the largest nitrate reduction facility in North America, at a cost of 7.5 million dollars to ensure its drinking water did not exceed the federal standards for
nitrates.
The people who tried to persuade farmers to sign up for the nitrogen reduction programs say
many of the farmers were skeptical that they were the cause of the problem. Some didn’t care.
And some were just skeptical of government programs and the red tape involved.
Steven John is the Executive Director of the Agricultural Watershed Institute. He’s still working
with farmers to reduce nitrogen runoff in the region. Today, the reason is not Decatur’s lake but a problem farther downstream.
“To a fairly large extent, the driver for addressing nitrogen issues now is loading to the Gulf of
Mexico. And, in one sense, because we’ve been at this for some time here and developed a little
bit of a history of city-farm cooperation– also developed good monitoring data, you know, to be
able to look at trends over time– we’re in good position to use our watershed as something of a
laboratory to test ideas that might be applied elsewhere in the corn belt.”
Nitrogen from the Decatur lake watershed eventually flows into the Mississippi River. Illinois,
just like all or parts of 37 other states drain into the Mississippi and finally to the Gulf of Mexico.
There researchers believe the nitrogen fertilizes algae growth, so much so that when the algae
dies and sinks to the bottom of the gulf, the decomposing vegetation robs the water of oxygen
and causes a dead zone that can be as large as the state of New Jersey some years.
But getting farmers to change their farming practices when it was causing problems for the city
next to them was difficult. Getting them to change for a problem hundreds of miles away is even
tougher.
Ted Shambaugh is a farmer who has changed. He says the reasons farmers don’t take the
nitrogen problem more seriously is complicated, but as far as he’s concerned, it’s part of how
farming has changed in the last few decades:
“This is going to fly against a lot of common thought, I suppose, about the farmer, and it does get
me in trouble sometimes, but the farmer has become inherently lazy in his management
techniques. They’ve even gone to the fact that even though they’ve got a 150,000 or 200,000
dollar tractor sitting there, they hire their nitrogen put on. Why do they do that? Well, a lot of it
is because they then have somebody to blame. That, if it didn’t go on right, ‘Well, I didn’t do
that.’ Well, we kind of think that’s what we get paid for, is management.”
Most people in cities like Decatur won’t say things like that about the farmers in the countryside
about them. The economic well-being of many of the cities in the corn belt are highly dependent
on agriculture. Criticizing farmers is just not done, even when many of those farmers won’t lift
a finger to clean up the water that their city neighbors have to drink.
Environmental groups are praising a group of companies, including Microsoft, Toyota, and Hewlett-Packard. The companies are phasing out the use of a plastic called PVC. But environmentalists say there’s a long way to go to protect the environment from PVC. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton reports:
Transcript
Environmental groups are praising a group of companies, including
Microsoft, Toyota, and Hewlett-Packard. The companies are phasing out
the use of a plastic called PVC, but environmentalists say there’s a long
way to go to protect the environment from PVC. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Tracy Samilton reports:
PVC, or Polyvinyl Chloride, is a plastic found in a host of construction,
automobile and home use products. When something made of PVC is
burned, it releases toxic chemicals. The most dangerous is dioxin, which
is believed to cause cancer.
Steven Lester of the Center for Health, Environment and Justice says
municipal incinerators aren’t the only ones burning PVC. People in rural
areas do too. He says trash service is much more expensive for those
people.
“Many people find it cheaper to just burn their trash in the backyard and
get rid of it that way.”
Some studies say after industry, open burning is the second highest
source of dioxin in the environment. Only 18 states have banned open
burning, but others are considering it.
If only your electricity meter could talk... (Photo by Kenn Kiser)
If the summer heat’s had you cranking up the a/c… you might be anxious about getting a big bill in the mail. Imagine if your house could send you an email to warn you that you’re spending a lot… before the bill arrives. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams explains:
Transcript
If the summer heat’s had you cranking up the A/C, you might be anxious about
getting a big bill in the mail. Imagine if your house could send you an
email to warn you that you’re spending a lot before the bill arrives. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams explains.
In the future, your electricity meter could talk to you.
You’d be able to type into your computer how much you want to spend on lighting and cooling
your house each month. Using wireless technology, your utility meter would
then send you an email when you’re going over those goals.
It’s a system created by mechanical engineering students at the University
of Michigan. Professor Steven Skerlos advises the team.
“As a recent homeowner, it was very obvious to me that even I had little
awareness of the impact that I was having and the consumption of course
until it was way too late. The bill comes a couple months later and you
can’t go back in time and turn down the thermostat or use less water.”
Skerlos says the system can also be used in water and gas meters.
But it might be several years before you can get the new system. Skerlos
says he’s had interest from the companies that make the meters, the next
step is getting utility companies to buy in.