Much ado about pipes

by Rikki Hall

Under pressure from the federal government and the City of Knoxville, Knox County finally passed a new stormwater ordinance intended to protect waterways from silt and other pollutants coming from developed land. The ordinance expands buffers around streams and allows developers to use low-impact site planning and building designs in stormwater management plans. Commissioners Tony Norman and Greg “Lumpy” Lambert gave dueling speeches from the podium to preface deliberations. Norman, a former biology teacher, emphasized the importance of clean water to the community, while Lambert stressed the economic impact of development. Norman proposed raising the minimum fine from $50 to $1,000 but was voted down. Lambert offered several amendments. He tried to remove federally mandated language about endangered species, claiming “environmental extremists” had put it there. His amendment loosening restrictions on pipes installed in public rights of way was adopted by the commission. Confusion reigned briefly during the meeting when John Valliant, head of the Home Builders Association, spoke to commission about “our amendments,” until he clarified that he was referring to the amendments offered by Commissioner Lambert. City officials, promised a stronger ordinance by Knox County in 2001, contemplated whether to sue over delays and weaknesses in the ordinance, and city council passed a resolution condemning the new regulations.

Modern moonshiners in Georgia

by Rikki Hall

The first commercial cellulosic ethanol plant is being built in Georgia. Range Fuels broke ground on a plant that will eventually generate 100 million gallons of fuel-grade ethanol per year. Wood waste will be the primary feedstock, but the plant can also handle waste paper, fruit pits and other sources of cellulose. Rather than fermenting sugars or using enzymes to break down cellulose, the plant will use a cheaper, patented thermochemical process to convert fibers to ethanol. The plant is in Treutlen County, between Macon and Savannah, and the company expects to open more like it throughout the region.

Red List released

by Amanda Womac

Over the course of Earth’s history there have been five significant mass extinctions, according to Dr. Jack Sepkoski and Dr. David Raup in a 1982 paper titled “Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record,” published in the journal “Science.” The first great extinction took place around 440 million years ago and wiped out 85 percent of marine animal species. In the second, known as the Late Devonian extinction, nearly 70 percent of species were eliminated over a prolonged period of time, possibly 20 million years. Earth’s largest extinction occurred about 245 million years ago. Up to 95 percent of all animals were lost in what is known as the Permian-Triassic extinction, or the “Great Dying.” Sea creatures suffered most in the fourth mass extinction, which took place 200 million years ago.
The most familiar mass extinction took place 65 million years ago during the Cretaceous-Paleocene transition, in which three-quarters of all species, including dinosaurs, were eliminated. Possible causes for these extinctions are volcanic eruptions, meteorites colliding with the Earth and a changing climate. Biological diversity and richness took upwards of 10 million years to recover, yet once a species is gone, it is gone forever. Most biologists, including E.O. Wilson, renowned Harvard University professor, believe we are moving toward another mass extinction that could wipe out half of all species on the planet in the next 100 years. Although climate factors into the equation for the upcoming extinction, finger point at one single species as the cause for the massacre: humans.
The current extinction rate is 1,000 to 10,000 times faster than extinction rates over the past 60 million years. For most of geological history, new species evolved faster than existing species disappeared, so biological diversity increases. Now, however, evolution is falling behind and humans are the main culprit. Scientists estimate that 10-15 million species inhabit the planet today, yet thousands of modern species have been lost for good, some before scientists even discover them. Across the globe, consumption drives habitat destruction and fuels extinction. What people need to survive and what people want are fused and muddled by cultural conditioning. Industry manufactures cheap, plastic crap most people throw away in five years and replace with an equally cheap, plastic piece of crap, which prolongs a cycle of consumption that is killing other species.

State of the Species
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), now known as World Conservation Union, released the 2007 Red List of Endangered Species Sept. 12. According to the list, 16,306 species are threatened with extinction, up from 16,118 last year. The total number of recently extinct species has reached 785, and 65 species are only found in captivity or in cultivation. One in four mammals, one in eight birds, one third of all amphibians and 70 percent of the world’s assessed plants are in jeopardy.
“This year’s IUCN Red List shows that the invaluable efforts made so far to protect species are not enough,” said Julia Marton- Lefèvre, director general of the IUCN. “The rate of biodiversity loss is increasing, and we need to act now to significantly reduce it and stave off this global extinction crisis. This can be done, but only with a concerted effort by all levels of society.”
The IUCN began in 1948 following an internationial conference in Fontainebleau, France, and brings together 83 states, 110 government agencies, more than 800 nonprofit organizations and 10,000 scientists and experts from 181 countries. Its headquarters are in Gland, Switzerland.
Species vanish due to a number of different factors, but the most pressing is loss of habitat. Most species on the Red List have lost over half of their habitat and breeding grounds. Resource extraction displaces many species and hampers reproduction. Invasive species contribute to species decline. Global trade provides plenty of opportunities for non-native species to invade.
American chestnuts thrived in Eastern forests until a fungus arrived on ship from Asia in 1904 causing a blight that destroyed most chestnut trees by 1950. Other species have suffered the same plight and face similar futures unless humans curtail habitat destruction and prevent invasions.

Gorillas and seeweeds, goodbye
According to the Red List, groups threatened with extinction include humans relatives. The western lowland gorilla has moved from endangered to critically endangered, decimated by hunting for bushmeat markets and the deadly Ebola virus. Population numbers have decreased more than 60 percent over the past 20 years, and scientists worry gorillas will not be around too much longer.
“Great apes are our closest living relatives and very special creatures,” Russ Mittermeier, head of IUCN’s Primate Specialist Group, said in an interview with the Associated Press. “We could fit all the remaining great apes in the world into two or three large football stadiums. There just aren’t very many left.”
The Sumatran orangutan is listed as critically endangered, and the Bornean orangutan is endangered. Both species are threatened by habitat loss due to logging, legal and illegal, and forest clearance for palm oil plantations.
For the first time in history, coral has been added to the Red List. Ten species of coral located in the Galapagos Islands were listed, with two in the critically endangered category. Climate change is a major factor in coral decline. Seventy-five various seaweeds from the same region have been added. Warming water inhibits cold-loving varieties, and overfishing removes predators from the food chain, resulting in an increase in sea urchins and other herbivores.
In Asia, the Yangtze river dolphin is listed as critically endangered, possibly extinct. India and Nepal’s gharial, a large aquatic reptile, is critically endangered due to habitat loss. A population decline of 58 percent over the past 10 years caused by dams, irrigation projects, sand mining and artificial embankments, has reduced its domain to two percent of its former range.
In North America, 723 species of reptiles were added to the IUCN’s Red List. Ninety percent of these are threatened with extinction. Vultures are in crisis due to a drug used to treat livestock. Almost 10,000 species of birds are listed. Over 12,000 plants are on the Red List, and the Malaysian herb, wooly-stalked begonia, has been declared extinct.
Although the outlook is grim for many species, biodiversity and conservation are gaining momentum. Conservation networks are working to enact policies that preserve habitat. Public awareness is up, and a newer generation wants to ensure biodiversity in the future. As we move forward, words of E.O. Wilson ring as true to today as in 1985:
“The worst thing that can happen during the 1980s is not energy depletion, economic collapse, limited nuclear war, or conquest by a totalitarian government. As terrible as these catastrophes would be for us, they can be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing in the 1980s that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by the destruction of natural habitats. This is the folly that our descendents are least likely to forgive us.”

For a complete listing of species, see
www.iucnredlist.org

Changing climate

by Rikki Hall

All of East Tennessee as well as adjacent counties in Virginia and North Carolina fell into exceptional drought conditions, the National Weather Service’s worst designation. Streams flows hit record lows, with data extending back a century and beyond, and smaller tributary streams went dry. Campfires were banned in Great Smoky Mountains National Park and in National Forests in North Carolina, where burned acreage was four times above average just over half way through the year. Lightning also ignited several fires in Tennessee National Forests. Wells and farm ponds dried up, and a gnat-borne disease killed deer forced to drink from stagnant water. Water levels behind some dams dropped below winter levels, though TVA had been releasing only enough water to maintain minimum flows in the main channel since February. Hydropower production was down 40 percent, and both coal and nuclear generators had to be temporarily shut down at the height of summer because the river could not absorb the heat in their effluent. Corn crops failed, trees were stressed, and wetlands sported cracked mud and dead cattails. Forecasters warned that it will take a year or more of average to above-average rains to recharge the water table.

Kiwis purchase Pigeon River paper mill

by Rikki Hall

Blue Ridge Paper Products, which owned the former Champion International paper mill in Canton, N.C., was purchased by a New Zealand firm, Rank Group, for $338 million. Rank owns Evergreen Packaging of Pine Bluff, Ark. and announced that it would merge operations of the two mills. Blue Ridge Paper moved its headquarters from Canton to Memphis and shed its chief executive and other officers. Employees owned 39 percent of Blue Ridge Paper, but they were bought out for $750 each in the sale.

Plastic bags get sacked

by Beth Buczynski

We all have them balled up and tucked into drawers, cupboards and closets around our homes. In Africa, they are jokingly referred to as the national flower because of their tendency to spring up just about anywhere: petroleum-based plastic bags.
These conveniently handled sacks carry our groceries and line our bathroom wastebaskets. They also litter our streets, clog our sewers, choke our wildlife and poison our soil and water, not to mention taking copious amounts of oil to produce and up to 1,000 years to break down in our landfills.
Earlier this year, San Francisco became the first U.S. city to take legislative action outlawing the use of plastic bags and requiring the city’s 54 largest grocery stores and pharmacies to use only compostable or recyclable bags.
Other cities like Boston, Annapolis, Baltimore and Los Angeles are considering similar legislation. Bags have already been outlawed in Taiwan, South Africa and Bangladesh.
In March of 2002, the Republic of Ireland became the first nation to impose a tax on the almost 1.2 billion plastic bags used in that country annually. Known as the PlasTax, the levy requires retailers to collect 15 cents for every plastic bag distributed at the point of sale.
According to a press release issued by Ireland’s Department of the Environment and Local Government in January 2002, the tax was intended to encourage use of reusable bags and to change people’s attitudes toward litter and pollution. Following the introduction of the PlasTax, annual consumption of plastic bags dropped to 230 million, an almost 90 percent drop saving almost 18 million liters of oil.
According to San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, a per-bag tax similar to the one instituted by Ireland would be a practical solution to decreasing bag use and covering costs of the managing waste stream. “In San Francisco, we considered this [tax] in 2005 but instead entered into a voluntary agreement with the grocery lobby,” Mirkarimi wrote in an April editorial in “USA Today.” “Not only did they fail to meet the terms of our agreement, they disingenuously helped engineer legislation to prohibit California cities from charging fees to recuperate costs associated with plastic bags.”
Opponents of the San Francisco ban cite the high cost of producing compostable bags (10 cents versus one cent per plastic bag) and difficulty of recycling (compostable bags must be segregated from regular plastic) as reasons why the ban will be ineffective.
In an NPR interview in March, Peter Larkin, president of the California Grocers Association, which lobbied against the ban, said member stores already have an active plastic-bag recycling program.
“In our opinion, it will frustrate our efforts to continue to reduce, reuse and recycle carry-out bags,” Larkin said. “Second, it will raise the cost of doing business for us, which will translate into increased costs for the consumers. It may unintentionally lead to the use of paper bags only, which would increase waste.”
But is recycling really a viable solution? Despite valiant efforts from state and local governments and some businesses, barely one percent of the 380 billion plastic bags distributed annually throughout the United States end up the recycling bins, according to the EPA. The rate of paper bag recycling is higher, about 10 to 15 percent, but paper bags generate 70 percent more air pollutants and 50 times more water pollution than plastic bags.
So how do we solve the paper-or-plastic riddle? The answer is neither. Many environmentally conscious consumers are turning to high quality, reusable bags and totes to help them shop and carry items more sustainably. Demand for these bags has created a flourishing business for online companies like www.reusablebags.com and www.clothbag.com., whic offer canvas, hemp and burlap bags in every size, shape and style. If you are not keen on rushing out to invest in a brand new reusable bag, this is a great time to examine that cupboard full of plastic bags in a whole new light.

Putting the new back in nuclear

by Rikki Hall

The Tennessee Valley Authority board decided to complete construction of Watts Bar Unit 2 nuclear reactor, which was started in 1972 but scuttled in 1985 as TVA’s reactors proved consistently more expensive to build and operate than had been projected, plunging the agency billions of dollars into debt. In 2001, TVA wrote off as a loss the $1.7 billion already spent on Watts Bar Unit 2. Completion of the reactor is projected to cost $2.49 billion and take five years, according to a $20-million study by Bechtel Power Corp. and a consortium of contractors likely to bid on the construction contract. The reactor will generate 1,180 megawatts of electricity when operational. An environmental review of the project concluded it would have no significant impact, mining, enrichment and disposal of the spent fuel falling outside the scope of the review. As with Unit 1, in operation since 1996, the reactor will draw millions of gallons of water from Watts Bar Reservoir as a coolant, then return the heated water to the reservoir.

Cash in or clean up

by Joel Smithson

Russian explorers manning the deep submergence vehicle Mir-1 traveled two and a half miles under the North Pole on August 2, planting a rust-proof titanium flag on the seabed to symbolize their nation’s claim to a chunk of the Arctic half the size of Western Europe.
The mission was the first in history to reach the staggering depths of the polar seabed, but the scientific victory was undermined by a fierce political agenda: an estimated 25 percent of the world’s oil reserves are trapped in the seafloor under the frozen ice sheets.
Other Arctic nations have no intention of standing idly by while Russia reaps the benefits of the melting ice, especially while the planet writhes in the grip of an energy crisis. Norway, Denmark, Canada, and the United States immediately disputed Russia’s claim to the 463,000 square miles of international territory, but Russian leaders are resolute to maintain an aggressive stance.
“The Arctic is ours and we should manifest our presence,” Artur Chilingarov, deputy chairman of the Russian Duma, said after the Russian parliament called for construction of Arctic airfields and reinforcement of Russia’s northern naval fleet to “ensure full control.” Russia filed a claim with the United Nations in 2001 to expand its ocean territory beyond the 200 miles established by the Law of the Seas Treaty. Russia aims to prove that the Lomonosov Ridge, an underwater mountain range stretching from Russia to Greenland, is an extension of Russia’s continental shelf, essentially extending Russia’s oceanic borders up to the North Pole. The U.N. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf neither accepted or rebuked Russia’s claim in 2001, demanding further study before they would make a decision. Russia plans to resubmit the claim and expects an answer by 2010.
Russia’s threatening stance is reminiscent of the totalitarian state that postured against the Western world during the Cold War. Since the polar flag was planted, a sense of urgency has spread through other Arctic nations. Plans for exploratory missions and a military presence in the Arctic have already been initiated to counter Russian efforts. Denmark launched an exploratory mission on August 13, two weeks after Russia fired the starting gun. The Danes intend to collect data to support a counterclaim to Russia’s declared sovereignty over the Lomonosov Ridge, since it also connects to Greenland’s continental shelf. Greenland is a Danish territory.
In reaction to the Danish mission, on Aug. 10 Canada’s prime minister Stephan Harper announced plans to build two new military bases in the far north, saying Canada has a “real, growing, long term presence in the Arctic.” Tension between Canada and Denmark traces back to 2005, when Canada sent two warships to Hans Island, an unclaimed rock in the waters between the two nations, to stifle Danish missions in the region. The ensuing standoff puzzled scientists, since studies of the region show no signs of oil near the island.
The United States has the weakest claim to the Arctic. Only Alaska’s northern coast is in the Arctic Circle, and there are no underwater mountain chains leading into international territory from Alaska’s continental shelf. Some political analysts suggest the U.S. should support claims of other Arctic nations and lead a cooperative, multinational campaign to establish a Western presence, resisting Russian tenacity.
“The U.S. and its allies are not interested in a new Cold War in the Arctic,” said Ariel Cohen, senior research fellow for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies. “A crisis over Russian claims in the Arctic is avoidable if Russia is prepared to behave in a more civilized manner.”
One day after the United States launched a four-week research mission to map the Arctic seafloor, Norway called for a halt to the race. Norwegian foreign minister Jonas Gahr Stoere urged Arctic nations to remember that international laws and procedures exist to properly handle territorial disputes. “If anybody is under the belief that we solve this by racing up there with flags or other demonstrations of sovereignty, those who say that are wrong and they should be told they are wrong,” Stoere said. “There is no need to see this as a race, it is not the way you settle these kind of issues.”
No nation involved shows any sign of slowing their campaigns, however. Unlike Antarctica, whose territory remains international under the Antarctic Treaty, no such treaty exists in the Arctic. The opportunity to claim sovereignty, coupled with diminishing energy reserves and increasing impacts of climate change, is propelling the conflict.
The race for the prize is causing alarm in environmental communities as well. Groups such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Polar Heritage Committee are urging political leaders to look at scientific data showing impending, irreparable damage if climate change is ignored. “The big melt has begun,” Jennifer Morgan, climate change director of the WWF, said. “[Industrial nations] must cut emissions of CO2 now.”
Scientists say global warming is causing polar ice caps to heat up faster than the rest of the planet because of feedback loops. The 2004 Arctic Climate Impact Report (ACIA) explained how exponential effects could leave the Arctic free of ice during summer by 2070. More recent studies by McGill University suggest it could happen by 2040. Snow and ice in polar regions reflect 80 to 90 percent of solar radiation back into space. As these reflective surfaces shrink, more solar radiation is absorbed by the underlying land or sea. The extra heat causes further melting, accelerating the impact.
Pal Prestrud, vice chairman of the steering committee for the ACIA, said melting ice is a threat to all Arctic species, most notably polar bears. Polar bears hunt their primary prey, the ringed seal, on ice sheets. Loss of hunting grounds has bears scavenging in rural communities, where they may be wounded or killed. Higher infant mortality rates foreshadow a bleak future for the emblematic polar carnivore.
Scientists speculate that if emissions are not curtailed, polar bears will be extinct in the wild by the end of the century.
“Polar bears are walking on thin ice,” Samantha Smith, director of WWF’s Arctic program said. No pun intended.
Indigenous Arctic people are airing grievances as well. The Inuit of northern Canada have become frustrated with the lack of preventative action by industrial nations, particularly the United States, which is responsible for roughly one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions. “We know the planet is melting and with it our vibrant culture, our way of life,” Shiela Watt-Cloutier, chairwoman of the Inuit Circumpolar Committee, said. In 2004, Watt-Cloutier announced to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights her people’s intention to sue the U.S. “Europeans understand this issue, but in America the public know little or nothing, and politicians are in denial.”
Though awareness has increased over the years, the recent race for Arctic territory does not foretell efforts to curb emissions. Instead, international oil interests are poised on the starting line, waiting for the ice to melt.