The Environment Show #384, 1997 May 10

This is the Environment Show. It's about our stewardship of the Earth and the beauty
and mystery of life in all its forms. The Environment Show is a national production
made possible by the W. Alton Jones Foundation, the Packard Foundation, the Turner Foundation,
the J.M. Kaplan Fund and Heming's Motor News, the Bible of the Collector Carhabi,
1-800-C-A-R-H-E-R-E. Your host is Peter Burley.
Coming up on this week's Environment Show, Washington DC's neglected anacostia river
struggles to renew its health with help from the folks who live in its banks.
Polluted in abandoned industrial sites or brownfields in cities and towns can be redeveloped
saving greenfields out in the countryside. We talk green about how it can be done.
And in the Earth calendar, Swift's swirled on a chimney in Oregon. Does the chimney
suite become a gourmet chef specializing in bird's nest soup? These stories are
more coming up on the Environment Show.
Two rivers flow through our nation's capital. The more famous one is the Potomac River,
with well-known monuments along its banks. The city's other river is the anacostia. Few
tourists visit the area which runs through the eastern half of the city. It's the other
side of Washington DC, poor, minority and often neglected. The fight for the anacostia
survival may signal hope for communities across the country. The Environment Show's Thomas
Lallie brings us this report from Washington.
The tide slowly creeps up the muddy shore of the anacostia river, while the turtle
sands itself on a log about 50 feet off. Undeveloped greenspace like this area covers
much of the shore all the way up to the anacostia's mouth. So in some ways it's hard to believe
you're in a city, but the garbage floating on the water strewn in the tree branches
and littering the grass brings you back to reality.
You can look around, you can see the debris all over the place. The debris may appear cosmetic,
but it's a symptom of not caring. It's a symptom of neglect and marginalizing the
very thing that sustains us as our natural world.
Robert Boone is with the anacostia watershed society. He says the river has a long history
of human interaction, first with Native Americans and then with European settlers. During
colonial times, Bladesburg, Maryland on the anacostia in just north of Washington was
the most active port around. It linked the areas tobacco fields with the Chesapeake Bay
and out to the ocean. But by the mid-1800s agricultural runoff filled the anacostia and
that became unnavigable. Its banks became home to many freed slaves and Washington became
a highly segregated city which it remains today. Through this time the anacostia like rivers
elsewhere was used as the city's source for drinking water and at the same time its
primary sewage dump. Jim Connelly is the executive director of the anacostia watershed society.
He says times haven't changed much.
Probably the single biggest problem affecting the DC's rivers, particularly the anacostia,
is combined sewer overflows where you have during a rainstorm raw sewage gets diverted into the river
before it gets to the treatment plant and that causes you know that's 1.2 billion gallons a year
in DC's water so that's quite quite a big slug of pollution affecting the health of the river.
But Robert Boone says looking at it from a broader perspective, a problem facing the anacostia
is the same facing other rivers around the world. Human habitation is basically the biggest
problem. The Potomac watershed is huge compared to anacostia but for 5th of all the people live
in the Potomac watershed live in Washington and it's where we are it's where the problem is and
it's just our lifestyle, our impervious surfaces and our refusal to get out of the car to stop
driving. While people are the source of the river's problem some people are hoping to be the
solution. All around the anacostia its neighbors are rediscovering the river and beginning to fight
for its renewal. Frazier Walton is the president of the Kingman Park Neighborhood Association.
At a recent community cleanup Walton joined a group of his neighbors with rakes and brooms,
pick up trash and stencil don't dump anacostia river drainage on the sewers.
The anacostia has been neglected for the last 30-40 years and just recently has the anacostia
have we begun to get some attention. We have a slogan that says river swimmable and fishable by
2000 and that's that's our goal is to make this river a fishable swimmable river. It runs along
the national park system and it's everybody's river and and we're hoping that that everybody will
have the use of the river and of course not to speak of the drinking water aspect. We're trying to
overemphasize like today with the stenciling project that this water is the very water that
goes to the treatment plant in southwest on the Potomac and used for our drinking water.
One of the key strategies to garner support for the anacostia is to get people to
use the river. Today some area kids are on anacostia rowing teams and groups like the anacostia
watershed society lead canoe trips down the river. But many here feel all these efforts may be
in vain if a new development goes through. Last year Congress passed a bill later signed by President
Clinton which transferred from the park service to now undeveloped islands in the middle of the
anacostia to the Washington City government for the sole purpose of leasing it out for a theme park.
The move infuriated environmentalist who said it sets a dangerous precedent
but the city hopes the 6,000 visitors expected each day will bring in badly needed cash.
Frazier Walton says it's a lousy idea. We don't believe that the city and our elected officials
should be involved in profit-making ventures for private corporations. This should be a function
of the private sector. Not of the government. The government's function is to keep the health
safety of the welfare of the community going. IE keeping the river clean and that's not their
priorities as we see it and we're saying that that's invite goes right to the heart of environmental
justice and so we will fight the local government on that issue as well. While some of Walton's
neighbors picked up trash others handed out signs saying no theme park on the anacostia river.
Most people gladly mounted them in their front yards. This neighborhood and others along the
anacostia are a long way from the flashy images of Washington's lawmakers celebrity journalists
and stately buildings but through them flows a river which many see as a symbol of hope and renewal
for an area long neglected. For the Environment Show I'm Thomas Lally.
We're talking green and I'm your host Peter Burlite. Today we're talking about brownfields.
These are properties that have been contaminated with chemical pollution. In many cases they're
the guts of cities and towns where factories once stood. If they can be developed green fields or
open space outside of town might be saved but first they have to be cleaned up. Developers are
wary of liability and community leaders want to make sure the environment is safe. Are they
rolled industrial sites in your town that could be developed? Give us a call. Our number is 1-888-49-green.
And my guest today are two experts. Charlie Barch, senior policy analyst specializing in economic
development issues at the Northeast Midwest Institute of in Washington DC and Winita Joyner. She's
at IELTS. It's a non-profit community development corporation based in Trenton, New Jersey and she's
director of community development and site remediation. Charlie Barch, let's start with you.
Are there a lot of brownfields around the country and why are they getting so much attention?
Well, there are a lot around the country and there's been different studies done. I mean it's kind
of a hard number to get a real fix on but there's a number of estimates in the 500,000 range. So
clearly there's a lot of sites and they really are everywhere. Now when you say 500,000 brownfields
what is a brownfield as far as you see it? What would fall into that category?
Well, I think EPA has put together a very good definition which is certainly one that I kind of
go by. And a brownfield is a site or a facility where the contamination and then here the second
part is an important part or the perceived threat of contamination really affects the ability to
reuse the site for the reasons you just laid out liability and so forth.
And so for people who haven't thought about it we're talking about a place that has got either
so much contamination or people think it's so bad they don't want to be there.
Right and it may not have to be so bad. I mean a lot of probably many thousands of sites have
fallen to that number maybe just closed gas stations where it's just an old tank in the ground
and a lot of the sites are very small. They really really do run the range. I mean they're not
it's not just the abandoned huge steel site it's it's the sites that are really in very much
every community. All over. So we need to join a year with a Don Prophet
organization that's involved in community development. Yes. What are the special problems from a
community perspective that are presented when a brownfield site is to be developed?
Well there's several really one of the problems that we've incurred when we first go into a community
we have found that communities have gotten to the point where they really have accepted the brown
field and I mean that in the sense that since it's been sitting there for so long
they have basically internalized and said well I guess this is just part of our community.
When we have gone in to say to them well look there's a possibility that this may be redeveloped.
The very first challenge that we come up against is one of trust that that element of trust.
Traditionally brownfield redevelopment has really been put to the side only for developers and
municipal governments. So that means that if there's a site in the middle of an unthinking of a
small town now where they had a little factory that made log homes and they put a preservative
all over the ground and it's now contaminated with dioxin if the community wanted to develop that
into a playground for example. It becomes really difficult. They can't do it because of the dioxin.
Well it becomes very difficult. I won't say they can't do it but let me use a site that we have
right here in the city of Trenton. It's the Magic Marker site and it's called that only because
Magic Marker was the last tenant. This particular site was used about 30 or 40 years for the
manufacturer of batteries. Very high levels of lead ranging from 400 to 49,000 parts per million.
Pretty scary stuff. Very very scary because anything over 400 parts per million you don't want
folks around. Because the levels are so high it actually has been deemed an environmental site
on contact so there's a fence around it. When you ask what does it mean to a community when they
have these kind of sites. Let me give you another example using the same site directly across the
street diagonally is a public school, elementary school. There's no green space. So what do children do?
Of course children or children. They look at that as an urban Disneyland, a place to play to run
across, to have adventures. Less than 100 feet on the north side of the building is a residential
street where people have experienced residue of ash and things of that sort falling off the roof
of the building. So when they go into redeveloping one of the first things the community says is
can we be involved? Can we be involved in that decision making piece?
Charlie I know that one of the things that you hear a lot about is developers saying we'll develop
but we don't want to clean it up to the same standards that EPA would otherwise require because
it's too expensive or what have you. How is that situation normally dealt with in these redevelopment
projects? Well actually just a tiny clarification. EPA, federally EPA is getting I think very much
more realistic and open-minded than how they look at clean up standards and they are very willing to
work with states to define alternatives for sites that may not be used for things like playgrounds
or for homes for families with children are going to be. And I think really what is really starting
to happen and again we the institute really looked at about 30 successful reuse situations,
your projects where they've really overcome all these barriers and had real success stories.
And in virtually every case you know responsible active community involvement played a very
important role in helping to determine what would be used at those sites and then once those
decisions are made that really does help you. You know what's one either was suggesting to
determine really the type and the nature of the claim that you have to do. And it's because we are
now getting to the point where we recognize that that variables can be accepted and they can work and
they can be protective of the environment of the environment and the people who are going to have
contact with those sites. I mean that I think sort of flexibility is really generating a lot of
opportunities. Let's look at that within the context of an email question we had and the question
was I live in St. Louis and there are sites which I'm told have not been developed because
developers are afraid of liability. How do you deal with that question? What is being done so that
a developer might come into a site that they would not otherwise because they're afraid they may
get to. There's probably a lot of factors at play at that site and I think what we're finding with
our with a lot of our examples if the economics can work if the numbers can work you know there's
not the liability issues can be overcome. And so what have you learned about how the community
ought to get involved when people start talking about developing a site that might be right in the
middle of where they live? Absolutely. Number one we advocate that the community should be involved
in the very beginning because we realize that redevelopment is a long term process. It acts as a
wonderful catalyst for going into a community and beginning to build capacity in relationships with
community folks. And also it offices an opportunity to be in educating people about environmental issues
about why it's important to protect the environment about questions that they need to ask the city
and developers. It also gets them prepared so that by the time a decision is really ready to be made
which is usually about two or three years out. You've got a community who is now well-versed. They
understand the process. They understand information. Okay well let's go to the call. Let's go to the
phones and I see that we have a call from Mary in Chicago. Mary you're talking green in the
environment show. Thank you. I'm Mary Nelson from Bethel new life which is a church-based community
development corporation very much involved in turning our environmental problems into possibilities
for community economic development. How's it coming? Well exciting stuff happening. We turned the
fact that we were an ex-to-an-incinerator into an opportunity to develop some recycling businesses
and material processing plant cash buyback center. So you're the kind of community leader that
when Eda was talking about that the community has to get involved. How does a community
get one of these dead poison sites doing something productive for the folks that live around it?
What did you folks do? Well we are fortunate having a partnership with the Argonne National Laboratory
and National Department of Energy Lab and who have helped us learn the skills and the
we've passed on to others we call it environmental triage industrial triage looking at the build
and old industrial buildings in our area to identify which ones are redeemable. Not just from an
environmental point of view but also for a good business site. And how did you deal with the issue
of how much contamination is acceptable? Well we participants in Illinois on a whole initiative
trying to sort out can you have different gradations of acceptable things for industrial reuse
sites that might be a little different from acceptable conditions for land for a daycare center.
Exactly. Shirley Barch, let me ask you about that. The idea as I take it that's catching on is that
instead of having a standard level of cleanup you clean up to the degree necessary depending on
what's going to be used there. Exactly. Is that good public policy? What about it? Well I think it's
realistic public policy because one of the reasons that really spear had the growth of the brownfield
issue is the fact that there's so many sites where nothing is being done and then conversely we're
losing so much farmland and exerb and area. And so there's just a real reason to have to deal
with this. And I think that one of the things that's happening is I think there's being a very
interesting marriage of science and the needs of people. I mean we're getting much better now
than we were even a couple of years ago using technology to identify contamination to determine
how clean needs to be clean for any given site. And with I think strong community involvement you
can start making some of the land use decisions that make sense for an area that can bring some
development back and also provide for really a safe environment for people to live. And one of
the quick point too if you can identify in a site in a community and everyone can agree that it
need only be cleaned to an industrial use for industrial purpose what that translates to in dollar
terms for it for a prospective developer it can be hundreds of thousands of dollars of savings.
Mary thanks for your call. The thing that I think that is so interesting about this issue is that
ours is a country that's always looked at land is something you could move it use up and move west.
And now we've hit the ocean and the core of our cities is rotting and we're building shopping
malls and so on around the outside. Presumably a good brownfields program could be the key to
revitalization of urban areas. Absolutely. If I could I wanted to just touch on something that
Mary said which I think it's critical to the success of this especially if you want to talk about
long-term successful sustainability in communities with the brownfield development and she mentioned
the word partnerships and I think that's absolutely critical and we want to make sure we don't move
site of the importance of partnerships and of building linkages with the community with the
Department of Environmental Protection with government with educational institutions and the
list goes on and on. I think that once we've been able to solidify these partnerships it forms
a wonderful foundation for building. Well let me ask you something that seems to be going on at
there. I saw a circular recently from an insurance company that was putting together a pot of
something like several hundred millions of dollars and literally dozens and dozens of sites
and they were going to go into the business with partners of a massive redevelopment scheme in
which these sites were being treated almost like bananas they were getting them in bunches.
Is this Charlie where the brownfields movement is taking us as it relates to development or
in the country? Well there's definitely movement in that direction and I really hope that that's not
the only type of movement. What that does do though it does a couple of positive things. One it
certainly shows a lot of people that these sites are viable in the sense that you can
clean them and reuse them and make money in the process and I think that's an important lesson
that has to be learned and it also you know approaches that size are clearly needed in some
of the larger sites but we don't want to lose sites though that many of the sites that need
attention are much smaller sites. Okay well I am afraid our time is up and we've been talking about
brownfields as a means of developing cities and hopefully protecting greenfields. My guests have
been Charlie Barch from the Northwest Midwest Institute in Washington and we'll need a
joiner of Isles a nonprofit community development corporation in Trenton, New Jersey. Again we've
been talking about brownfields and let's hear from you our number is 1-888-49-Green and I'm your
host Peter Burley. Stay tuned the earth calendar is next.
This is the time of year when animals are on the move taking advantage of the changing seasons.
Vose swifts are just one of many bird species moving from south to north. Vose are common on the
West Coast and each year University of Argonne Biology professor Dan Gleason says people await their
return. They're coming in in large numbers and they will each evening coming into a local
tall chimney here on campus of the University of Oregon. So you'll see large numbers of these
birds just before a sundown thousands gathering in the sky and circling around the chimney into a
big funnel cloud that disappears down into the chimney in a matter of minutes. So it's almost as if
you are watching smoke pouring out of a chimney but in reverse. Gleason says this year he
estimates the swarms of swifts are comprised of about 5,000 birds. In the fall the numbers are
about twice that. Swifts natural habitat is in hollowed out trees but as forests have been
replaced by cities chimneys have made good substitutes. Gleason says swifts are natural
flyers spending most of their time in the air. Unlike other birds their feeder too small to roost on
tree limbs and they rarely land on the ground because their wings are poorly constructed for ground
takeoffs. Almost all of their activities are in the air except when they're on the nest or
broosting. Swifts are probably the fastest of any of the birds in the world. They have narrow
pointed wings so in order to get good lift they need to fly it fairly fast. So they fly typically
30 to 45 miles an hour so when they're foraging there are reports of white-throated swift
flying it speeds close to 200 miles an hour when alluding and diving,
a parican falcon. A swift nest is often made of material they've been able to accumulate while
flying. This doesn't leave the much to work with so they've developed ways of coping.
Gleason says the swiss building secret is also the secret for a famous supressipi.
They have very large salvera glands and they secrete a sort of a sticky saliva and they use that to glue
the nest material to the structure and it's very tight. There's a swift
swiftlet in Asia. Some in Asia that's the entire nest is just the little shelf of this dried saliva
and it's that that's used for the bird's nest soup. Nothing like a cup of dried swift saliva soup.
Maybe this is the way to solve funding problems for a higher education in Aragam.
We can train the undergraduates to climb into campus chimneys and scoop out all the old birds'
nests and sell them to fancy restaurants. Thanks for listening this is the Environment Show and I'm
Peter Burley.
This is the Environment Show and I'm Peter Burley. Still ahead. Amendments to federal
budget bills are designed to eviscerate protection for endangered species and wilderness areas.
We lock horns over whether a landfill should be constructed near the Joshua Tree National Park
in California. Fistie Terry Swarrington demonstrates the passion which earned her the 1997
Goldman Prize for being the most outstanding citizen environmental advocate in North America.
And our ear to the ground meets a professor who hangs out as long as he's
rather than use electricity from a nuclear plant. We're spiritually renewed on the pathways we walk
across France and Spain on a pilgrimage and Nova Scotia's Rankin family finds their renewal
costing a river. These stories still ahead on the Environment Show.
It's budget time on Capitol Hill and the environment like almost every other form of endeavor
is an issue. Things are not as dramatic as last year when budget cutters threatened to put the
US Environmental Protection Agency out of business but Greg Wetzdome, Legislative Director for the
Natural Resources Defense Council or NRDC, a National Environmental Organization, says proposed
riders on appropriation bills could seriously undermine protection for endangered species
as well as wilderness areas. We're looking at a bill that would provide some funding relief
for flood victims and unfortunately to move that is disturbingly like those we saw in the last
Congress, some of the more extreme forces in the Senate and in the House as well are seeking
ad provisions that would undermine important environmental protections. In this case, what's at risk
is the Endangered Species Act for one, there is a proposed loophole that would allow any work on any
kind of water project that could be associated with flood control to proceed without any regard
for protection of endangered species. So the requirements of that law are simply suspended
and has tremendous repercussions particularly for protection of salmon in the Northwest which are
often at risk through flood control efforts. Then there's a second provision which is another
any environment right or if you will that's been added onto this budget bill and that concerns an
effort to open up a loophole that would allow the construction of roads and highways through protected
areas in our national forest and wilderness areas and wildlife refuges. Basically this is a
proposal that says if there's an existing wide of way which could be interpreted to mean a
burrow trail, a footpath then that is considered enough to allow the construction of roads and highways
through that wilderness area and usually following the construction of roads is development and we
lose the qualities that we're protecting these areas for to begin with so this is a two extremely
important efforts to weaken crucial environmental protections. What Stone says that is in the past,
the environmental community will be trying to eliminate those expenditures that hurt the environment
such as forest service road building which enables clear cut timber sales on public lands that
actually lose money. These battles will be fought out in coming weeks but first his concern is to
maintain protections in existing environmental law. But what we're seeing right now unfortunately is
a return to the days of the last congress where there are efforts to put you know direct attacks on
landmark environmental protections and sneak them on the budget bills and to their credit. The
Clinton administration is saying that they will veto these measures if they survive and we hope
that they don't get that far but if they do we are hopeful we'll get a veto.
Another budget issue to watch is superfund. This is the program to clean up toxic waste sites.
A tax on petroleum and certain other products has been assessed for some time and deposited in a
fund to pay for cleanup. That tax is now expired. Cleanup is still going on but it will end if the
tax is not reauthorized. At the moment reauthorization of the tax is being held up in the Congress
because some legislators want to change the superfund law before funding for cleanup is renewed.
This opens a major controversy because some insurance company and industry lobbyists want
the public to pay more for the cleanup costs as opposed to the polluting industry that
caused the problem in the first place. The proposal is strongly opposed by environmentalists
who consider the principle that the polluter should pay is fundamental to their beliefs.
Recently proposed developments on the outskirts of parks have been getting a lot of attention.
The federal government is committed to buy out a planned gold mine next to Yellowstone.
One and a half miles from the Joshua Tree National Park in California,
the Eagle Mountain Landfill is under consideration. It's being designed by the mine
reclamation corporation to provide a long-term solution to the waste disposal needs of Riverside
County and the Southern California region. Proponents say the site has favorable climate and
geological features as well as rail access and that MRC will donate $1 per ton of trash to preserve
other habitats. Opponents argue the facility will worsen the park's air quality in harm-while
life and destroy habitat. We're joined by Rick Daniels, president of the Mine Reclamation
Corporation and Brian Hughes, Pacific Regional Director for the National Parks and Conservation
Association. They lock horns over the question should the proposed Eagle Mountain Landfill
in the proximity of the Joshua Tree National Park be approved? Mr. Daniels.
Yes, it's critical that Eagle Mountain be permitted and approved.
Eagle Mountain Landfill and Recycling Center Project is a project to reclaim and abandon
iron ore mine that has been devastated by 40 years of mining activity. It's in a remote isolated
area and is designed to provide non-Hazardous, solid waste disposal capacity for Southern California.
Currently there are over 30 landfills handling 135,000 ton of day of non-Hazardous,
municipal solid waste in Southern California and those landfills fail to meet the current
groundwater and air quality requirements and must be closed because they're harming neighborhoods
and the environment. Mr. Hughes in response? Well, yeah, we see Eagle Mountain Landfill as being
the worst kind of land use planning. Our National Parks are set aside to preserve those elements that
define us as a nation and Eagle are Joshua Tree National Park represent some of the most pristine
desert environment in the country and to put a landfill here is simply an untoward development.
We appreciate the need to find responsible solutions to landfill and capacity requirements for
our state's waste needs. However, we would expect that there be a process by which
sites can be chosen and permitted that don't affect our precious natural resources.
Okay, Mr. Daniels, it replied. The landfills designed to protect the park. It's blocked by a mountain
range. It's not visible. It's been through eight years of public review. It creates over 1500 jobs
and the public supports this project three to one throughout the state of California.
Mr. Hughes, the last word. I disagree. Our own polling shows that over 68% of Californians
oppose this landfill and quite frankly to say that we can put 20,000 tons of garbage per day for
over 100 years with no impacts to the natural processes of Joshua Tree National Park is simply
not true. We expect that the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors will realize the
economic downturn that this landfill represents and vote accordingly.
Gentlemen, thank you both. We've been joined by Rick Daniels of the Line Reclamation Corporation
and Brian Hughes of the National Parks and Contravation Association,
debating the proposed Eagle Mountain Landfill near the Joshua Tree National Park in California.
Gentlemen, thank you both.
While environmental groups do get out with corporations over things like the Eagle Mountain Landfill,
community members like you and me can be the real forces in these debates.
Terry Swarrington is a nurse and mother from East Liverpool, Ohio, who began to speak out 15
years ago against her proposed incinerator. She is the 1997 Goldman Prize winner for North America.
The $75,000 prize is awarded by the Goldman Foundation each year to one environmental activist
from each continent. I asked Terry Swarrington what she did to fight the incinerator,
which is since gone into operation. First of all, we educated ourselves.
I think that was the most important thing and then tried to branch out and try to educate others.
When we really got nowhere through the regulatory agencies or really people who were set up to
protect public health and the environment, we decided that we had to draw more attention to the issue
and we engaged in peaceful, nonviolent, direct action or civil disobedience.
And some of those things that we did ultimately ended in our rest and we were jailed for our actions.
And so how much time did you spend in jail?
Well, I spent a total of about 15 days in jail. I still have 15 days left at the local level
in the county jail on a waiting list. Is that when bed spaces available?
Well, yeah, they kind of have a waiting list because there's just not enough space and
so I guess you have to wait your turn to get in. It is kind of funny, but I have spent time in
not only the county jail and the local jail, but in Washington, D.C. jail as well.
And I think that was the most difficult.
You say that you went to the government presumably with your public health background. You said
you're concerned about lead levels. What did they say?
You know what? It seems as if the regulatory agencies and the agencies set up to protect human
health and the environment only do their job if it doesn't conflict with corporate interests.
Really, it was totally the whole process. I mean, they run you through this process of public hearings,
really all just sham processes almost to rubber stamp the permits. If this is something that the
government backs because of the backing of a big corporation or whatever, it seems like.
And that's really one of the lessons that we've learned in all of this is that corporate
interest prevails.
Swarington believes that the incinerator was built because corporate money won over common sense.
She says when a project like this goes through, it signals a breakdown of a democratic process.
Looking at this facility, it is not needed, it is not wanted, and it's not safe.
Right now in this country, and this is according to U.S.E.K.A. figures,
there is excess incineration capacity. I mean, I think it's ridiculous. This is just, it's insane
that there is, that the existing incinerators that I mentioned earlier are not even operating at
capacity, and yet they thought that they had to build another one right next door to an elementary
school.
And so how does one get to the fellows that are generating the stuff that goes to the incinerator?
I mean, that's really what you're talking about.
I don't think that they're going to do it on their own because there's a, there's a one thing
that we have learned is that there are two kinds of experts in this country. There are experts
who work in the corporate interest, and then there are experts and non-experts just average citizens
like myself who work in the public interest. And in order, and the problem with going to the
corporate experts is that they all have the same value system, and that value system says,
make a profit at any cost. We're looking at short-term economic gain. And so unless it's mandated
by the federal government that there should be some law enacted that they have to reduce
the amount of waste that they're generating, or go to zero emissions standards,
or be forced into using new, for new facilities, clean production technologies,
unless they're forced into that position, I don't think they're going to do it.
Ultimately, what we're trying to do is restore democracy. I think that, you know,
what we have seen now in this country is that we actually live in a wealthocracy.
Society that grants influence and power and direct proportion to wealth, I think that campaign
money and corporate dollars interfere with proper representation. And this crosses party lines.
I'm not pointing my finger at Democrats or Republicans. I think it's in general our government
is paying more attention to the money interest and giving them more access
than they are to ordinary citizens.
Terri Swerington is a nurse from East Liverpool, Ohio, and the winner of the 1997 Goldman
Prize for North America.
I'm Linda Anderson and this is Here to the Ground with stories about
people affecting change in the environment. This week, close the plants, hang your pants,
the clothesline plan, a positive approach to change in your backyard.
A group of college kids in New England find the answer to their environmental concerns
are blowing in the wind with the clothesline plan, an anti-nuclear campaign.
The idea explains founder and middlebury college senior Alex Lee is to educate the
public about the dangers of nuclear facilities and the benefits of solar energy by encouraging
communities to give up their clothes dryers. The group has been hanging giant symbolic
clotheslines on college campuses and trying to get people to hang out there,
their clothes in their dorm rooms around campus.
Lee says the plan, which is a project of free the planet, the largest national student environmental
organization is using clotheslines as a way to air their grievances about the costs and dangers
of nuclear energy. By hanging clothes out to dry, Lee hopes individuals will be encouraged to
take environmental issues into their own hands and think about how they can make changes in their
own lives. The group has sent out packets of information to other campuses,
cells, wooden drying racks made by a local artisan. And Lee says, answers questions like,
can I hang out my clothes in the wintertime?
That high school chemistry stuff about solids turning to vapor without going through the liquid
state really is true and people can definitely do that year round. We have in my household
my entire life hung out our clothes. All you need is a little bit of sunshine.
Your clothes will smell better. He adds, last longer and clothes on a clothesline are beautiful.
Lee hopes the clothesline plan will catch on beyond college communities. He recognizes
that clotheslines alone won't eliminate the need for electricity. But thinks that hanging out
clothes is a proactive way to respond to our overly consumptive habits and to point out the
dangers of nuclear power plants. With ear to the ground, I'm Linda Anderson.
The environment show wants to hear from you and I'm Peter Burlite. Our number is 1-888-49-Green.
Leave a message and we'll get back to you. Our email address is green at wamc.org.
Tell us what's in your mind about the environment and send us your questions.
You can visit us anytime where you can hear the environment show anytime over the internet.
It's at www.enm.com-slash-envshow.
We all have places which are special to us. For some, they're city streets. For others,
they're deep in the wilderness. Lee Hoenaki, author of the book El Camino, presents a portrait of
his special place which he describes by his light and the effect it has on his being. For him,
the place is the path which he traversed as he made a pilgrimage from France to Santiago de
Compostela in Spain. It's believed to be the burial place of St. James. Hoenaki walked 500 miles
in 32 days over spectacular and ancient terrain. After several hours, I began to feel something new,
something never before experienced. I strongly sense with my whole self that I am moving from one
place to another. Puzzled, I nevertheless clearly realize that I have never tasted anything like this,
never known about this. I am not passing through space as one does in a car or airplane.
This is a radically different sensation. I feel I am in a place, actually in an infinite number of
places. I am not in an undifferentiated space. What one feels in many modern places that really
are non-places. There are simply repetitions of concepts, the concept of hospital space,
shopping mall space, airport space, highway space, suburb space, and so on. Here, with each step,
I am always in place, in some place, going to the next place, one centimeter or half a meter
farther on. There is something solid about where I am at every moment, and all my senses seem to be
more open, more aware, they seem to be taking in much more. It is as if I am plowing through
infinitely different perceptions, for with every step I am in a different place, and each place
has its own unique character. At each step, if I stop and sense where I am, what is around me,
I know I see that it is different from the previous place. Is this what poets mean when they celebrate
the wonders of creation? Being out here in creation, I sense too that the light is always specific
to the place and the moment. There is no such thing as undifferentiated light, as more or less light.
The character of light changes constantly, with the soil under each step, since light too is
particular, and contributes strongly to my sense of this place and moment, differing from all the
others. As the thickness of the air changes with each meter of elevation, so to the quality of
the light in each distinct space. Part of my sense of fixing a certain place in my memory
derives from the nature of the light illuminating or hiding that scene or spot.
In this place, for example, I shall never forget the way the early morning light
filtered down through the pine trees, with just a suggestion of mist here and there.
In conventional terms, I am surrounded both yesterday and today by an attractive landscape,
but that is not what I experience. I do not look at a scene, rather I move into what I see.
I become more and more immersed in a new kind of beauty. The creation is good, that is, a good
specifically made to be enjoyed as beauty.
Lehanaki
Lehanaki met many challenges on his journey. Sometimes he would walk all day through driving
rain. Other days his muscles ate. He found that encountering sacred spaces, both natural and human
made, brought him spiritual renewal. The Rankin family is a full group from Nova Scotia.
The river, a song of their release endless seasons, talks about the positive changes a journey can bring.
No, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I
I, I have the Healthcare Four, all eight of our fans of our first needle,
and O'er the Last know Fried Instead Of Caug chega!
Branshnia Flashbad!
My granny Sun and I have to cross on a little whatsapp.
My night sh gray-
MY GANNematics, Wait for me and my granny.
Are you a Shirala Senador?
The doll was a harmonizer and stage,
your time easily.
When you cross that river,
the rains will be your wine
and the brown bulls your mandolin,
the year's to dance upon.
When you cross that river,
the moon will give you rest
and the night will be a blanket in sun.
Your morning gaze.
Until the end.
Past your sea greener on the other side.
The lander don't bite your time easily.
When you cross that river,
the moon will give you rest
and the night will be your wine
and the brown bulls your mandolin,
the year's to dance upon.
The night will be your wine
and the night will be your wine.
The night will be your wine.
When you cross that river,
the days you wait
and before you feel peace upon,
you're worth you any day.
Because when you cross that river,
it feels like land you reap
and your children like every spring
will not leave.
The River, a song by Nova Scotia's Ranking Family, off their release endless seasons.
Thanks for being with us on this week's Environment Show.
I'm Peter Burling.
For cassette copy of the program called 1-888-49-Green, and asked for show number 384.
The Environment Show is a presentation of national productions which is solely responsible
for its content.
Dr. Ellen Shartock is the executive producer, Thomas Lally is producer, and Stephanie Goyce
is the associate producer.
The Environment Show is made possible by the W. W. Alton Jones Foundation, the Turner
Foundation, the J.M. Kaplan Fund, the Packard Foundation, and Heming's Motor News, the monthly
Bible of the Collector Car Hub, 1-800-CAR-HER.
So long and join us next week for the Environment Show.