It’s what’s for dinner?

The United Nations recently released a report recommending the farming of insects for food.  The report notes that insects are highly nutritious and healthy with high fat, protein, vitamin, fiber and minerals.   With concerns about animal diseases like “mad cow,” genetically modified foods, overuse of antibiotics, cruelty to animals, lack of space for farming, management of animal waste, etc., the UN thinks insects may be part of the answer.

“Insect farming” isn’t new – think of bees, silkworms and crickets you can find at the local pet store for lizard food.  However, the concept of large scale farming insects for food is relatively new.

High soy prices and increasing aquaculture is pushing research into developing insect protein for aquaculture and poultry – if not directly for human consumption.

In many countries, including the US, the lack of a legal framework on insects as food and feed may be a major barrier to investment and development.  The UN report noted concerns regarding:

• Unclear regulations and legislation on farming and selling insects for human consumption;
• Difficulty in understanding information regarding processing and quality;
• Little networking among producers;
• A lack of awareness among consumers and buyers about existing markets leading to low demand; and
• It is difficult to market insects for human consumption because they are perceived to be unsanitary. (Or as we call it in my family, the “ick” factor).

Would you eat a tofu made from bugs?  It makes me think of the old movie “Soylent Green“  – it’s bugs!

In February, we mentioned that, in an effort to combat the low water levels in Michigan’s smaller harbors, the Michigan House of Representatives had introduced a bill that would amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act to include “the dredging of Great Lakes Harbors for use by recreational watercraft” as part of “developing public recreation facilities,” thereby allowing money from the State Natural Resources Trust Fund (the “Trust Fund”) to be diverted to harbor maintenance. 

Unfortunately, it looks like that legislation is dead in the water as Michigan Attorney General, Bill Schuette, recently released an opinion (Opinion No. 7270) that the Trust Fund cannot be used for the maintenance of existing public recreation facilities, such as maintenance dredging of existing harbors.  His conclusion is based on the fact that the Trust Fund was established through an amendment to the Michigan Constitution approved by citizens, and therefore the Legislature cannot substantively change the meaning or scope of the constitutional language adopted by the people.  Because the relevant constitutional language uses the term “development” and there is an absence of any reference to “maintenance”, it was determined that the plain language of the Const 1963, art 9, §35, does not authorize the use of Trust Fund money for the maintenance of existing recreational facilities, including maintenance dredging of Great Lakes harbors for use by recreational watercraft.

The opinion also addressed whether funds from the Waterways Account of the Michigan Conservation and Recreation Legacy Fund could be used for the operating and maintenance of public recreation facilities, including the dredging of existing harbors. The conclusion?  The funds can be used for such a cause but such expenditures must be directed to public, rather than private, recreation facilities and the primary purpose of the dredging must be to enhance access for recreational watercraft.  

The impact of these decisions may be lessened if the weather continues to cooperate.  While the levels of lakes Michigan and Huron are still 22 inches below their long-term average and 6 inches lower than last year, recent precipitation caused both lakes to rise 9 inches during April – a well above average rise for this time of year.

What else might the President do? He could:

1.  Impose heavier regulations on existing power plants, which reportedly account for 1/3 of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

2.  Fully disapprove the Keystone XL Pipeline which many have said will result in few permanent jobs but perhaps the “dirtiest” oil available.

3. Attempt to regulate fracking – which will be difficult under the current Congressional regime.

4. Ramp up government procurement – making sustainability a mandate; retrofitting government buildings and pushing renewable power for government operations.

5. Attempt to require methane capture during natural gas production.

6.  Continue pressure on automakers to improve gas mileage.

7. Adopt even more energy efficiency standards for household appliances and industrial equipment.

8. Promote planning and codes for resilience in design and construction to guard against catastrophic harms from events like Hurricane Sandy.

Interestingly, without governmental involvement, the market itself appears to be pushing companies to assign monetary value to their impacts on the environment as part of an overall drive toward “sustainability.”  Once you start measuring the impacts, it becomes easier for shareholders and the marketplace to drive less efficient companies toward efficiencies.  So, perhaps the President doesn’t need to do anything.

On Thursday, the USDA and EPA released a report summarizing the “state of the art” knowledge of the situation and ultimately concludes that this disorder results from a confluence of causes.  Key findings include:

• A parasitic Varroa mite is a major factor – while beekeepers treat for this, there are resistant mites;
• Genetic diversity and variation is needed to improve bee thermoregulation and disease and mite resistance;
• Nutritional opportunities need to be improved – like anyone else, weaker bees are more susceptible to harm from disease and parasites;
• The report recommends improving forage and a variety of plants to support colony health – even to the point of encouraging innovative land management techniques to maximize available nutritional forage to promote and enhance bee health;
• Most interestingly, the report recognizes Best Management Practices for bees and pesticide use exist, but notes that they are not widely or systematically followed – this needs to be improved;
• The report concludes that additional research is needed to determine risks from pesticides.

Hopefully, this is a solid step toward minimizing this disorder.  One thing the report says we can do is plant a variety of flowers to give the surviving bees a healthy environment to feed.

We have certainly come a long way from the challenges and problems that led to the first Earth Day -  a 1969 oil spill in Santa Barbara, California; the dead zone in Lake Erie; smog in Los Angeles and elsewhere and burning rivers in the Midwest.

The first Earth Day led to the creation of the US Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Air, Clean Water, and Endangered Species Acts.  As the EPA and its state counterparts have continued to regulate, there has been a backlash of business and media outcry which certainly must weigh on the public’s views.

The challenges we face today are far more complicated and, to many, more daunting.  We still have oil spills, but now they are from larger ships and deeper wells.  Lake Erie and many other bodies of water are still challenged by more diffuse and “below the radar” sources of contamination.  While reducing the impacts of asbestos, lead and NOx from our daily lives, and healing the ozone hole, we now face questions regarding greenhouse gasses, impacts from and in China and the developing world, and the challenges and benefits posed by fracking.

As is often the case, once the “low hanging fruit” of black and white are picked, what we are left with is grey and grey isn’t as shocking or engaging as black and white.  The issues are just as important, and in many ways, very high profile, but it’s unlikely that our polarized country would agree on what changes would be best, if any.

A couple weeks ago, the state of Michigan approved Flint’s plan to join Genesee and neighboring counties in the Karegnondi Water Authority project.  That approval, however, was subject to a final offer from the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD).  The final offer was delivered last week, but it appears that the proposal did not go far enough to lower costs in the Flint area and so Flint plans to join the pipeline project.  This means that Flint will ultimately separate from Detroit’s water system; an action that DWSD officials say will cause the department to lose about $22 million immediately and result in higher rates to residents throughout the region.  According to Genesee County officials, the rising costs and decreased reliability of Detroit’s system promoted the pipeline proposal.   

Once the Karegnondi Water Authority pipeline is complete, Flint will get 16 million gallons of water per day from Lake Huron and 2 million from the Flint River.  The water will be treated in Flint at existing plants (after modifications are made) and then sold to city customers. 

For more on the DWSD’s take, here is their press release from earlier this month.

The study attributes the algae bloom with long term trends in agricultural practices that increased phosphorus loading but also focused on meteorological conditions.  Apparently a confluence of weather-related conditions (weak circulation during summer 2011, chemicals staying in the lake longer, warm conditions after the bloom began) in the Spring of 2011 led to record-breaking nutrient loads to the lake during the late spring and prevented flushing nutrients out of the system.

While 2012 was reportedly better, this study raises concerns that Lake Erie could be at risk for a repeat of this pattern if climate changes impact the weather in just the right (or wrong) ways.

Recently, Arthur discussed

As you may expect, the plant produces a lot of waste solids.  Some of that waste is consumed by an anaerobic digester on site at the plant,  but the bacteria in the digester produces another kind of waste – methane (which, as Arthur pointed out in his post,  is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2).  So IEUA installed a fuel cell power plant that uses the methane to make electricity – enough to meet 60% of the plant’s electricity needs.  The byproducts?  Water and heat, and the heat is fed back into the digester to keep the sewage eating bacteria nice and warm – a win-win situation.

Fuel cells have been around for a long time and many companies have been, and still are, trying to make them a viable solution to our everyday energy and environmental needs.  Fuel cells can provide cheap, reliable energy with reduced emissions and fuel cell plants are smaller than other alternative energy technologies such as wind farms and solar panels. 

This 60 minutes piece, which aired in 2010, featured a story on Bloom Energy and shows that fuel cell technology is not without its cautiously optimistic skeptics.  Bloom produces power generators using its patented solid oxide fuel cell technology and  boasts a customer list that includes Walmart, ebay, Google, Staples, Owens Corning and AT&T. 

IEUA received its fuel cell power plant from Canada’s Anaergia Inc., using fuel cells supplied by Fuel Cell Energy Corp. of Connecticut.  Anaergia Inc. provided the plant to IEUA for free and will get its money back over time by selling the electricity the power plant generates to the IEUA.

A recent federal study regarding leak detection programs noted that an average pipeline leak results in a spill of over 29,000 gallons.  Aging pipelines are clearly a concern and, when they leak, they can cause massive problems.  That recent federal study called into question the industry’s current leak detection programs, noting that the public was as at least as likely to detect a pipeline leak as was the industry.

A typical buyer’s Phase I Environmental Site Assessment should identify the presence of an oil pipeline on, under, or across the subject property, but it won’t necessarily flag the pipeline as a “recognized environmental concern” unless the pipeline is known to have leaked.  This is a surprise to many landowners.  Michigan, like every state, is crisscrossed with natural gas and oil pipelines.  Michigan reportedly has the sixth most miles of pipelines in the Country (which was a surprise to me).   The Free Press published this map of oil pipelines and their leaks; the State has this map of petroleum product pipelines which does not include crude oil, natural gas or liquid petroleum gas (LPG) pipelines.

Michigan leaves the job of regulating oil pipelines to the federal government but the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has only 113 inspectors for the whole Country.  Federal rules require companies to inspect oil pipelines every three years, 49 CFR 195.573 and 192.723, – but reportedly there are exceptions for pipelines in lightly populated or non-sensitive areas. That may mean some pipeline segments are rarely, if ever, inspected.  The National Wildlife Federation reported that from 2000 to 2010, Michigan had 61 pipeline “incidents” (9th most in the US).

So, what should you do?  If you’re doing a Phase I ESA and a pipeline is reported, you should do further due diligence regarding the pipeline – How old is it? Who owns it? What is their track record? What is its inspection record?  What are the terms of the easement allowing its presence?  Maybe you should consider insurance (which will require a lot of data).  Yes, this will drive up acquisition cost but when you hear about the impacts on the properties in Calhoun County, Lansing, Arkansas, and elsewhere, this is where an ounce of prevention may truly be worth many thousands of dollars of cure.

This case started when I was in high school, when the US EPA alleged that the DWSD was violating the Clean Water Act by allegedly failing to treat sewage enough to meet the DWSD’s permit limits.  The case took many twists and turns and for every step forward the DWSD took, it seemed there was a step backward.

In the Spring of 2011, following a stipulated agreement, a new more-broad DWSD Board was appointed and a new Consent Order aimed at achieving compliance with the Clean Waster Act was entered.

Finally, in September of 2011, the Court required the appointment of a committee (the Root Cause Committee) to develop and propose a plan to fix the causes of the DWSD’s failure.  The Root Cause Committee issued a plan of action in 2011 and  a report earlier in March.  The Root Cause Committee had previously made recommendations regarding such things as DWSD governance, rates, personnel and procurement practices.

The Root Cause Report proposed wholesale changes to the DWSD including the creation of two regional authorities, the leasing of the DWSD between those authorities and the payment to the City of Detroit of at least $50 Million in lease payments funded by assessments in lieu of taxes.

The Court refused to order the implementation of the Root Cause Report but agreed that significant progress was being made due to: (1) the more empowered Board, (2) DWSD having its own functional human resources department and (3) DWSD having a new and improved procurement policy.  That progress was reflected in the 2011 Consent Order and MDEQ’s 2013 issuance of a new permit to operate  and so the Judge concluded that such progress warranted closing the case.

Will this “new and improved” DWSD be able to stay on the path to full compliance? Will the new Board seek a regional authority and a payment to the City to make that happen? How will the new emergency manager factor into this?  Only time will tell.