• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!


Vermont Environmental News

Page history last edited by Ian Balcom (Dr B.) 9 years, 4 months ago





IBM Leaving Town, But Still On Hook For Environmental Clean Up








Vermont’s bumble bee populations declining




      Yellow banded bumble bee.  Photo by Sam Droege/USGS.

Yellow banded bumble bee. Photo by Sam Droege/USGS.

Vermont’s bumble bees are in serious peril, according to a new study by the Vermont Center for Ecostudies. Three of the 15 bumble bee species found in Vermont are thought to be extinct and at least one other species is in decline. Bumble bees pollinate crops such as apples, blueberries and tomatoes, making them critical to Vermont’s agricultural economy.

Sara Zahendra, a field biologist with the Vermont Center for Ecostudies, says losing native bumble bees is cause for serious concern.

“There’s a lot that’s bad about losing native bumble bees,” she said. “One of the main things is that they are far and away the best pollinators of tomatoes. Where there aren’t a lot of native bumble bees, people have to hand-pollinate, which is incredibly expensive.”

Native bumble bees are more important than honeybees for crop pollination. Leif Richardson, an entomologist at Dartmouth College, said in a VCE news release that “Wild bees perform the majority of all pollination on Vermont farms, whether or not the managed honeybee is present.”

“As an ecosystem service, pollination is worth millions annually,” Richardson continued. “But we don’t know how the loss of native bee species will affect our food supply or overall environmental health.”

The bee declines cannot be attributed to one single cause. “There are probably a multitude of reasons,” Zahendra said. “All of them put together are causing a severe decline in some species.”

The causes include pesticides, the worst of which, for bees, are a class called neonicotinoids. The most commonly used neonicotinoid is imidacloprid, which is sold at lawn and garden stores.

Pathogens accidentally imported to the U.S. from Europe are also taking their toll. Between 1992 and 1994, commercial beekeepers shipped U.S. queen bumble bees to Europe. There, beekeepers reared colonies and then returned the queens and their colonies to the United States. Bee experts suspect that while in Europe, these bees picked up European pathogens against which our native bees have little resistance.

On top of these threats, changes in land use reduce food sources and nest sites for bumble bees. “The more flowers we cut down, the fewer bumble bees there are to gather pollen and nectar from those flowers,” Zahendra said.

Zahendra thinks what’s needed is for government to better regulate pesticides and oversee the importation of non-native species and pathogens. But she also says everyone can take steps to help bumble bees.

“Little things, like planting flower gardens and not mowing as often. Even just having small patches that don’t get mowed, that’s a small thing that everybody can do,” she said. She also says homeowners can be careful about what they spray on their gardens.

The VCE study was the most extensive bumble bee survey ever conducted in Vermont.

The VCE, based in Norwich, is a nonprofit organization that promotes science-based environmental conservation. Starting in 2012, VCE staff and volunteers gathered roughly 15,000 bumble bee observations from 1,500 sites across Vermont. Previously, university insect collections were the only source of information on bumble bee abundance, and most of those were from the University of Vermont, which meant little was known about bumble bees in most of the state.

The species thought to be extinct in Vermont are the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis), Ashton cuckoo bumble bee (B. ashtoni), and the American bumble bee (B. pensylvanicus). The yellow-banded bumble bee (B. terricola) is not far behind.

Many of these bees are struggling elsewhere, too. The rusty patched bumble bee, once common throughout the eastern U.S., has declined in nearly 90 percent of its former range since 2003, according to the Xerces Society, a nonprofit organization dedicated to conserving bees, butterflies and other invertebrates. The American and yellow-banded bumble bees are also in decline throughout much of their former ranges in the East and Midwest.

In the Netherlands and Britain, multiple native bee species have gone extinct and now the plants pollinated by those bees are less abundant, according to the Xerces Society.

Zahendra says there are many reasons to love bees, not just because they support our food supply. “They are so fantastic. Every time I learn something about bumble bees, it’s jaw-dropping,” she said. “Plus, they’re cute and fuzzy.”



State allows competition for e-waste recycling




Contentious contract negotiations for control of Vermont’s electronic waste recycling stream are starting to simmer down. But with the changed landscape come new rules and new challenges, if not land mines. Discarded electronics, called e-waste. Creative Commons photo by JohnJMatlock via Flickr

Discarded electronics, called e-waste. Creative Commons photo by JohnJMatlock via Flickr

The Department of Environmental Conservation has allowed Good Point Recycling, of Middlebury, back into a statewide program that lets Vermonters recycle used electronics for free. The former state contractor and sole dealer in the state’s discarded televisions, computers and printers has dropped a lawsuit against the state and now will compete with Casella Waste Systems for access to the scrap.

Good Point will operate an independent e-waste recycling plan on behalf of electronics manufacturers, while Casella runs Good Point’s former domain: the state’s e-waste recycling plan.

Both are free to residents. Manufacturers pick up the tab, ultimately passing the cost along in prices for new electronic devices.

Vermont’s e-waste recycling program is managed within the Department of Environmental Conservation, which is part of the Agency of Natural Resources. “E-cycles” is three years old, but competition for salvaged goods is new.

David Mears, the commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation, said the department’s priority is to ensure convenience for consumers and safe handling of the material.

“We don’t want any of these entities to be in default of their obligations,” said

That will involve some “shuttle diplomacy,” he said.

“We’re trying to get to a solution that doesn’t involve litigation,” Mears said. “We have no beef with either company. We’re just trying to make sure they meet the minimum statutory requirements of the program.”

Robin Ingenthron, buoyed by a hard-won approval for his independent plan, is optimistic.

“Before, by running the table, Casella and North Coast (Casella’s transporter) could put me out of business — or come so close to it that they negotiated with all the cards,” Ingenthron said. Now, he hopes to talk Casella into replacing its chosen recycler with Good Point.

“We can all wear white hats and sing ‘Oklahoma,’” Ingenthron said. The collaboration would build on the work Good Point and Casella have done together in various capacities for years, he said.

Michael Casella directed all inquiries to Casella Vice President Joe Fusco, who could not be reached for comment by press time.

Hairy negotiations resolved

In August, DEC stopped negotiating with Northeast Resource Recovery Association for renewal of its contract running the state’s “standard” e-waste recycling program. The New Hampshire-based nonprofit had held the contract for three years, during which time Good Point had built the program as subcontractor to NRRA.

In fall 2013, the new contract went to Casella instead, which in turn will subcontract to New Hampshire-based North Coast Services for transport of the hazardous goods and to the Finnish firm Kuusakoski for recycling out of Philadelphia or Peoria, Ill.

Shortly after granting the contract to Casella, DEC then rejected a bid by Good Point to operate an independent plan, as allowed by state law.

Persuaded to reconsider, the Department of Environmental Conservation let Good Point back in on Nov. 22.

Good Point’s independent plan was approved the same day the company and NRRA dropped two lawsuits that were filed in Superior Court in September, when Good Point and NRRA charged the agency with improper procurement practices.

In a letter also dated Nov. 22, DEC changed some of the program’s ground rules to accommodate the new competition for a robust yet finite market of discarded electronics.

Good Point reported more than 4.8 million pounds of e-waste collections in the program’s first year. Vermont’s average of 7.7 pounds per resident far surpasses that of the roughly two dozen other states that also require electronics recycling, according to an ANR report published this year.

New rules, remaining questions

Mears said his department is working with both Casella and Good Point to facilitate logistics of transitioning to a newly competitive system.

Both companies have an extension to sign up manufacturers to each of their plans, and still more time to land memorandums of understanding with e-waste collectors — mostly town transfer stations and solid waste management districts.

Additionally, the minimum number of collection locations each company must meet has been dropped, from 85 to 52 by Feb. 10, 2014. If each company meets that minimum, the total number will just pass the roster of 102 Good Point had built in its previous three years running the state contract.

Should a collection location not sign an MOU, either company would have the right to terminate services to the site after a 10-day notice period, according to a letter from DEC program manager Cathy Jamieson to Good Point and Casella.

Ingenthron says he is confident his company can attain the goal.

“We already had 73,” he said. “So that was certainly not for us.”

Mears implied that divvying up the 102 existing locations is a matter of neither simple competition, nor math.

“Which company is going to cover which collection point and make sure they have enough time to talk to the manufacturers?” Mears said.

The paperwork granting Good Point authority to collect, transport and recycle the hazardous materials takes effect Dec. 1. But that doesn’t mean it has taken hold yet, Mears said.

He said part of logistical arrangements includes setting the “right date” with both Casella and Good Point, as well as collectors, to ensure a seamless transition.

One clause written into Casella’s state contract remains in place and is now triggered by the independent plan: The company is guaranteed at least $720,000 for up to the first 2 million pounds of e-waste it moves.

Technically, that guarantee applies no matter how much Casella collects. At 2 million pounds, the payment will be 36 cents per pound. At half the collections, the payment per pound would double to 72 cents.

“The company has every incentive and we expect that they will go on beyond the 2 million pounds,” Mears said. “They’ll probably be closer to 3 or 4 million.”

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.