Tuesday, 06 May 2003

We're All Ears

Everyone knows you can eat corn -- but can you eat using plates, cups, and forks made from corn? Absolutely, and doing so can help reduce both waste and oil consumption, say advocates of biodegradable corn products. Although it's not quite true that "anything that can be made from a barrel of crude oil can be made from a kernel of corn," as Randy Cruise, a Nebraska farmer put it, it's not far off: Corn can be used to make environmentally friendly plastics and fibers, and has already found its way into products from clothing to food packaging. It takes approximately a month for plastic bags made from corn to degrade in a compost heap, compared to the centuries it can take for an oil-based bag to decompose. The technology shows enough promise that Sony, Cargill Dow, and DuPont have all gotten in on the game. Environmentalists are reserving judgment until the process has received more scrutiny, but they acknowledge that its potential is tremendous.

A Less Perfect Union

Greenhouse gas emissions across the European Union increased in 2001 for the second year in a row, casting serious doubt on the ability of the bloc to meet its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol on global climate change. Emissions levels in 2001 were 1 percent higher than in 2000; under Kyoto, the E.U. is obliged to cut emissions 8 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2012. Individual countries have specific targets as well, and so far, only Germany, Sweden, Great Britain, and Luxembourg (which cut its emissions a whopping 44 percent between 1990 and 2001) appear to be on track to meet their target reductions. Spain, Portugal, and Ireland are lagging the farthest behind. From the beginning, the E.U. has been the most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol, so its inability to meet the treaty's terms could prove deeply embarrassing.

The Farmer and the Smell

The U.S. EPA could offer large industrial livestock farms amnesty from the federal Clean Air Act and Superfund laws, according to people involved in agency-industry talks. Rather than enforce the laws, the EPA would monitor pollution levels at roughly 30 large hog and chicken operations, a plan environmentalists and former enforcement officials say is far too lenient -- so lenient than local environmental regulators pulled out of the talks in protest. Huge livestock farms can spew foul odors and fecal dust into the air, as well as hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and methane from open-air cesspools. After the EPA began bringing cases against factory farms for clean-air violations in 2001, industry groups started approaching the agency asking for amnesty in exchange for agreeing to be monitored. In 2002, enforcement officials were told not to pursue any more clean-air cases against factory farms without approval from outside the agency's enforcement office, a move that was called unprecedented by Eric Schaeffer, the former head of civil enforcement for the EPA who resigned in protest over other issues last year.

Mexi-can't

The U.S. Department of Energy acted illegally when it found that two Mexican power plants would not have a significant impact on the air and water quality in the border region between northwestern Mexico and Southern California, a federal judge in San Diego ruled yesterday. That ruling calls into question the legitimacy of U.S. permits granted to the power companies to build cross-border transmission lines and could prevent the plants from exporting electricity to California this summer as planned. It could also bode ill for plans by energy companies to build as many as 20 other power plants in Mexico to sell electricity to the U.S. Environmentalists and human-health advocates in the region welcomed the ruling, which found that the Bush administration's cursory review of the plants did not adequately consider the potential environmental impact. Environmentalists contend that these impacts include increased salinity in the Salton Sea and emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, and ammonia.

Low Riders

The average fuel efficiency of the nation's cars and trucks hit a 22-year low of 20.4 miles per gallon during the 2002 model year, the U.S. EPA announced last week. That statistic stands in stark contrast to significant improvements in other automotive areas: Since 1981, average horsepower has increased 93 percent and average acceleration (as measured in the time it takes to go from zero to 60 miles per hour) has improved 29 percent. Environmentalists saw the report as a sign that fuel economy will not improve until the government mandates it, something the current administration is loath to do. The industry begs to differ, claiming that the answer lies in better technology and noting that fuel-efficient models are not as popular among consumers as more gas-intensive ones. Together, cars and light trucks are responsible for 40 percent of U.S. oil consumption and one-fifth of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions.