Hello friends, it's the Environment Show and welcome.
A gigantic proposed pump storage project in Wyoming is stirring controversy, though it
could provide power for all of Wyoming, opponents say it is neither economically nor environmentally
feasible.
Also this time, a visit with car care expert Robert Sikorsky, who has some very useful tips
for the environmental driver and the beautiful purple loose drive.
There's no natural enemies in North America and the plan is since taken over to most of
our wetland systems and our prime wetland systems and because of its strong competitiveness
it all competes most of our native wetland plants.
These stories this time on the Environment Show, a national production made possible by
Hemings Motor News, the national Bible of the old car hobby, monthly from Bennington
and by the J.M. Kaplan Fund of New York and this is Bruce Robertson.
In Northern Wyoming's Big Horn Mountains, a controversy is erupting over a proposed hydroelectric
power project.
Several horn energy Wyoming incorporated has submitted a final application to build a
pumped storage project on the dry fork of the Little Big Horn River.
Opponents believe the project will sacrifice one of the cowboy states' natural jewels,
solely for speculative use of public land.
More on the story from Bob Reha.
At 1000 megawatts, the proposed dry fork energy storage project would be the largest of
its kind in the western United States, with more than enough capacity to meet the peak
power needs of the entire state of Wyoming.
Project spokesman Larry Bakari.
It's roughly $800 million dollar capital construction cost, a five-year construction period project,
and very general terms.
Construction of two reservoirs, an underground connecting waterway in an underground powerhouse.
Unlike conventional hydroelectric plants, a pumped storage plant such as the dry fork
project utilizes cheap power at night to pump water into a high reservoir.
During the day when power demand and prices are higher, water drains back to a lower reservoir
driving turbines and generating electricity in the process.
With cycle and transmission losses, pumped storage typically recaptures only about 70% of
the required pumping energy.
Most of the citizens action group, Sheridan Area Resource Council, based in Sheridan,
Wyoming, say, the project is neither economically or environmentally feasible.
First of all, this project is being built in an area which was designated or was proposed
for designation as wild and scenic by the Forest Service.
Group chairperson, Penny Vance.
This is a very inadequate application.
It leaves a lot of loopholes.
The primary thing is, do we need this power?
Where?
Who's interested in buying it?
How would we resolve things like the transmission lines which would be the existing ones are
totally inadequate for the power, which means a whole new transmission lines would have
to be developed?
And that is essentially not even a part of the application.
Littlehorn Energy Contents, the power produced by the project, can be sold to utilities in
the Northwest, who are forecasting an eventual need for additional power.
But Vance notes, Littlehorn's application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
or FERC fails to mention that none of the seven targeted utilities in the Northwest
market has offered to endorse the project.
In addition, Vance points out the three-year extension of Littlehorn Energy's temporary
FERC permit expires this summer.
To ensure future rights to develop the project, the company must apply for the license now.
Littlehorn Spokesman, Larry Bakari.
All of the data, the projections, as well as references from other agencies who indicated
the need for power are all listed in exhibit B of the application.
And it's not my, I don't have the authority, and would not engage anyway in a public debate
with these people about those issues.
Another unresolved question regarding the project's application is concerned voiced by the
Crow and Northern Cheyenne tribes regarding water use and the potential destruction of
cultural sites.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is expected to respond to Littlehorn Energy's application
in early September or October.
Bakari says the commission can either accept the application for filing and begin the public
process of granting a license or instruct Littlehorn Energy to supply additional information
concerning the application.
Penny Vance says, regardless of the action taken by FERC, the Sheridan Resource Council
plans to continue its fight.
It's a matter of educating people once they're educated.
If they believe the information and we do a good job of documenting what we come up with,
they tend to be at least concerned and very often opposed.
Littlehorn Energy's plans call for construction to begin in June of 1994 with Operation Schedule
to begin around the year 2000.
But for now, both sides appear to be gearing up for what could be the biggest fight yet
over public lands in the Big Horn Mountains.
For the High Plains News Service, I'm Bob Reha.
The High Plains News Service is a production of the Western Organization of Resource Councils
in Billings, Montana.
Car repair expert Robert Sikorsky is best known as author of the newspaper column, Drive
It Forever.
Now Sikorsky is out with a new book.
From Bumper to Bumper says the author in the introduction, quote, covers every part of
your car from bumper to bumper, including the person behind the wheel.
The author contends that how we drive our cars is just as important as how we maintain
the engine.
As he writes elsewhere, quote, a new view of automotive maintenance is needed.
One that says taking care of a car is not only good for the car, but essential for the
planet.
It is one of the few things we as individuals can do where we can make an impact on the
environment the very next time you get in your car.
I mean, you don't have to put a brick in your toilet tank.
You don't have to collect papers and save them and crush aluminum cans.
The very next time you get in a car, you can make a positive impact.
One of the easiest steps we can and should take to improve our car's performance and
effect on the environment is to change the oil every 3,000 miles.
Sikorsky reminds us that old oil is full of extremely toxic substances, most of which
come out of the tailpipe.
We also need to be aware and concerned about evaporative emissions, vapors from the gasoline
in the tank.
These toxic vapors are usually trapped in a charcoal canister in the engine and burned
off with other exhaust when you run the engine.
This canister must be checked periodically as it can malfunction.
However, each time we open the gas cap to fill the tank, we break into this closed system,
releasing highly toxic vapors that often we breathe in right away.
To prevent these vapors from escaping during fill-up, Sikorsky has a simple remedy.
Get a coffee, a plastic lid off of the 1 pound candy coffee.
Punch a hole in it so it just fits over the nozzle of a gas pump and cut it then to
just fit the size of your filler tank.
As soon as you take that cap off, put this little plastic thing over there that will have
a cross cut in it and then stick your nozzle right through the plastic.
That little bit will help prevent those fumes from escaping.
It's not going to cost you a penny to do it and you can find other, perhaps you have
a little piece of rubber that wide little fit or anything to help block those fumes.
If you can do that, you're making a big contribution towards clean air.
Things and many other procedures are things we can do to the car and engine to help it
run cleaner and less expensively.
But Sikorsky says another component we often overlook as we overhaul the engine is not
even under the hood.
It's right behind the wheel.
Our driving habits, says Sikorsky, may be as hazardous to the environment as any malfunctioning
part of the engine itself.
For improvements here, we do not need tools or money.
They are free.
If you only take one tip from this program, one of the most important things you can do
is when you start your car in the morning, when it's cold, this is on a cold morning, don't
let your car sit and idle to warm up.
So many of us have this habit and it's absolutely the wrong thing to do, not only for your car
but for the environment.
The car, there's only one time during the operational cycle of a car when the catalytic
converter is not working nor is the oxygen sensor working and that's when it's cold.
These units must warm up before they become efficient and start cutting pollution.
So right after you start your car in the cold morning, your car is absolutely just spewing
pollutants into the atmosphere.
The best way to prevent that, and remember, if you let it sit and idle, it's wasting
gas, you're getting zero miles per gallon and it's really gas hungry during that period
too.
Get in your car, let it idle for no more than 10 to 15 seconds, put the car in gear and
get moving using slow to moderate speeds.
Now a lot of people say, well, I can't do that.
My car will stall out if I don't let it warm up.
It shouldn't, if your car is in proper tune, if everything is working right, it should
not stall.
15 seconds should be plenty of warm up time.
Granted, your heater's not going to be working.
You're going to be a little bit chilly in your car for a while but nobody said environmental
driving was that easy.
So we can sacrifice a little bit.
And here's another habit we need to break.
Let's say you just came home from work and you parked the car out in the street instead
of pulling it into your garage.
As it turns out, you don't need the car that night and after the 10 o'clock news, you
say, well, I'm going to go out and pull the car in the garage to protect it for the
night.
You go out, you started up, you pull it into your garage, you go no more than say 60 to
100 feet and your car runs for no more than 30 seconds.
By doing that, by just pulling it into your garage, starting it up, pulling it in, you've
created the equivalent amount of engine transmission and rear axle where as if you would have
driven the car 500 miles on the highway.
Have we also produced the same amount of carbon dioxide during this period?
Absolutely.
Especially the toxic pollutants because during that 30 seconds it took you to pull the
car into the garage, you could actually drive your car probably for the rest of the day
and not create as much pollution as you did during that 30 second span.
New York Times columnist Robert Sikorski from Tucson, his recent book, From Bumper to Bumper,
is available from Tab Books, a division of McGraw Hill.
Looking to the future of car driving, Sikorski sees great promise in reformulated gasoline
and solar electric powered engines.
But whatever the fuel, there will always be steps we can and should take to keep the engine
running at peak performances, not only for our wallet, but for the atmosphere.
This is Bruce Robertson.
Joel MacCowell, editor of the Monthly Green Consumer Newsletter, says the debate over
environmental issues in this year's presidential campaign ironically does not focus on the presidential
candidates, but on their running mates.
Says MacCowell, Tennessee Senator Albert Gore and Vice President Dan Quail, together
represent completely opposing views on whether environmental protection and economic progress
can be achieved simultaneously.
However, says MacCowell, this debate misses the point.
The premise that jobs in the environment are at odds is a false one, of course.
The quality of the environment plays a key role in our economic health.
In places that don't have to deal with choking air quality, for example, companies can operate
more freely with fewer costly restrictions.
In places like Los Angeles or Mexico City where the air is simply unhealthy to breathe,
the resulting environmental regulations are so fierce that many companies simply pack
up and leave, taking jobs to cleaner climbs.
Clearly, pollution doesn't make for economic boom times.
Look at it this way.
If allowing companies to pollute all they want without government interference made for
a good economy, Poland and Romania would be among the richest nations on earth.
Now this is not to argue that all environmental laws are good or the more the merrier that's
certainly not the case.
Some federal laws, super fun, for example, provide little benefit unless you're a lawyer,
in which case there are endless riches to be had.
But government has a responsibility to protect not only a nation's resources, but its ability
to remain competitive over the long term.
Having a healthy environment is one key to long term economic stability.
As Senator Al Gore has pointed out in his bestselling and highly recommended book, Earth in the
Balance, nations that lack the leadership to adequately protect their resources, including
clean air and water, and a diversity of flora and fauna, are destined to be left behind
in the increasingly competitive global economy.
In other words, must take an active role in protecting the earth and persuading others
to do so too.
How much all of this will actually come into play in the Ruffin Tumble campaign 92 remains
to be seen, of course.
A lot of it depends on us.
How much we question and prod the candidates to make substantive statements about the issues.
Not just those photo opportunities, casual strolls through Redwood forests, visits to community
recycling centers and all the rest, but real, fact-filled statements about what each candidate
believes and how much he plans to address the challenges before us during the next four
years and beyond.
Such discussions should by no means be limited to the presidential candidates, of course.
There are thousands of others running for state, local and national offices.
Many of them will be in positions to make key decisions about environmental matters, whether
local zoning ordinances, national strategies or international cooperative efforts.
Some of them will help forge policies that will have long-term impact on such things as
land use, air and water emissions, transportation policy, recycling and endangered species, energy
use and on and on.
That makes each of us key players in the upcoming campaigns.
All of us must help encourage environmental discussion and debate to make sure that these
issues are injected into the election process.
To get going, after all, your job may depend on it.
The comments of Joel McCower, Washington DC-based editor of the Green Consumer Newsletter and
co-author of the popular Green Consumer Book.
His editorial remarks are heard from time to time on the Environment Show.
And this is Bruce Robertson.
Have you ever driven past a wetlands area or a low-lying meadow and noticed beautiful
tall purple flowers growing thickly and endlessly?
They seem to be everywhere and just about the most beautiful color you have ever seen,
even the breeze seems to have a purple tint to it?
You are being deceived, says Dr. Richard Malucky of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The bathroom Salahkaria, the flower's botanical name, is better known as purple loose
dry.
Basically the plan is one that came over on ships in early to mid-1800s and a lot of
people believe it was brought over in ships' balance, which was used to balance out the
cargo and the wooden vessels and then dumped into the port areas and got established
along the Hudson River coast and parts of New England.
And then gradually worked its way up the water systems and interior portions of the continent
over the next century or so.
Malucky says the plant spread with the movement of white settlers westward.
The age of the automobile and the building of highways also aided the spread of this
beguiling plant.
Today purple loose drive can be seen in most parts of the United States and even parts of
Africa and Australia.
No matter where it is, the plant is nearly overwhelming with its massive color.
It's a large robust plant.
It's most conspicuous in a late summer, mid to late summer because of its large flood
of purple flowers, hence the name or magenta color, whatever you wish there is.
Very poetic flowering species.
It's very conspicuous at this time of year because it dominates the mercy, as you mentioned,
that pretty well as a tall growing plant it may get up to six or seven feet in height
and becomes a dominant part of the marsh ecosystem as far as the plants are concerned.
And so when it blooms it makes the whole marsh look purple.
In fact, in some situations it does become the dominant plant species in a marsh.
In fact purple loose drive is now considered a nuisance plant.
One wildlife biologist would like to see reduced if not eliminated.
The plant's an energy plant, it's an exotic.
And although for say the first century during the late 1800s and early 1900s it wasn't
really good, regarded as much of a problem.
In the middle part of the 1900s it really took off and became a nuisance.
There's no good control measures for it.
It has no natural enemies in North America.
And the plant has since taken over most of our wetlands systems, some of our primal
wetlands systems.
And because of its strong competitiveness it all competes most of our native wetland
plants.
And it's actually degraded wetlands by causing most of our lot of many of our native wetlands
to die out or disappear from wetland environments because they're all competed by loose drive.
Though the blossoms are welcomed by honey bees for nectar, the plant has few other friends,
if only because of its numbers.
In fact says Maliki, loose drive, though unwelcomed by most animals and birds, has no natural
predators.
It does grow wild and free.
Being an exotic it's the other animals and plants bees, he's haven't adapted to
their co-exist with it.
But anything that really comes out in such large numbers as this becomes, you know, even
if you have large cat tail stands, they become detrimental to other plant species.
And in this case there's usually controls for most of our natural or native plants in
a community.
For loose drive we don't have controls.
The only thing that we found at RIDI fits well with loose drive is our wriggling blackbirds
nest well at it.
But most of our other wetland species, many of the birds, marshwrens and things like
this, bitters and that pretty much stay out of it.
And experiments we've done are test just to look at the preferences of show and mostly
species prefer cat tail and other native plants over loose drive.
The seed source on the plant is a very prolific seed producer, a plant will produce 2 to 3
million seeds, a large plant, but they're so tiny that nothing utilizes them.
And the stems are very coarse and rank and very few species can move through the marsh
that's just kind of inundated or taken over by loose drive.
And so there's a lot of detrimental aspects to it.
So what do we do when nature is its own worst enemy?
Malekki, a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working currently
in a cooperative research program at Cornell University to find a natural predator.
And it's been a problem since the 1950s and we've tried herbicides and we've tried
mechanical means and burning and changing water levels and just about everything that
we've had available to us to kind of prevent its spread into kind of reduce it in places
where it has been found and nothing's worked.
And most marsh managers, state and federal private have become very frustrated by the fact
that we haven't had any way to control it.
And in the Midwest and West now, I mean it's moving right through a lot of the irrigation
ditches of the mountains.
So it's become a problem nationwide and Canada's recognizing as a major problem.
So what we did about five or six years ago was initiate an effort to look at biological
control and that's to go to Europe and look for natural enemies for this particular plant
species which are absent from the American scene.
And we've been working with scientists in Europe to identify insects that feed on loose
drive and its native environment which is throughout Europe and parts of Asia.
What mainly we centered in Eastern countries to look for insects that suitably control
the plant over there.
Any concern that the insects themselves might become a problem once they've been introduced
to combat the purple loose drive that they could go on and become proliferate and become
a problem on their own?
I'm sure there's lots of concern for that and that's probably one of the number one factors
that's put right at the forefront of any kind of program to look at by.
Insects is biological control agents.
I mean we're all familiar with negative examples of insects that have come to the US and things
like Gipsy Moth and Japanese beetles and corn borers and things like this that have just
really had a detrimental impact.
But basically what we're looking at here is an insect or a group of insects that have
co-adapted with the plant in Europe and feed specifically on this plant.
We're looking at identifying insects that are host specific meaning that they feed on,
that they evolve to feed on nothing but purple loose drive.
Well like he says five insects that do feed on loose drive have been identified three of
which have been approved for introduction across North America.
Studies are continuing to verify the insects viability.
He says it may be three to five years before the insects are fully deployed and result
seen.
Dr. Richard Malucky is a wildlife biologist with the US Fish and Wildlife Service currently
working in a cooperative research program at Cornell University.
He says no one is saying the purple loose drive needs to be eradicated just controlled.
Even still it is hard to remember its threat when you look out across a meadow through
a veil of purple mist created by the rich blooms of the purple loose drive, Lithrum,
Salacharia.
This is Bruce Robertson.
And that's our report on the Environment Show this week for a cassette copy of the program
called 1-800-767-1929.
Ask for the Environment Show program number 142.
The Environment Show is a presentation of national production solely responsible for
its content.
Dr. Alan Shartock executive producer this is Bruce Robertson.
The Environment Show is made possible by Hemings Motor News, the national Bible of the
old car hobby monthly from Bennington for Mont and by the JM Kaplan Fund of New York.
