Howard Learner

Energywire: Board Shuts Down Vistra Effort to Fast-Track Coal Plant Ruling

Board shuts down Vistra effort to fast-track coal plant ruling

November 5, 2018

By Jeffrey Tomich

The Illinois Pollution Control Board denied a request by Vistra Energy Corp. to expedite new rules that would let the company run its dirtier and more profitable coal plants in the state more frequently.

In an order last week, the five-member board said the Irving, Texas-based power producer’s claims of “economic harms” didn’t justify an expedited rulemaking.

“The board is not convinced that the need to address wholesale energy market issues should control the substance or timing of proposed amendments to a substantive environmental regulation,” the six-page order said.

The order comes a month after the board proposed modifications to Illinois’ Multi-Pollutant Standard (MPS) that includes pollution limits for Vistra’s 18 coal units representing more than 5,000 megawatts (Energywire, Oct. 5).

The Pollution Control Board’s proposal is a sort of compromise between the power producer’s effort to get relief from existing emissions rules and critics, including Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) and a coalition of environmental groups, which want to keep existing standards in place.

Vistra had asked the board to finalize the rule change by Feb. 1, after which it would be subject to review by a legislative committee before taking effect. Madigan and environmental advocates challenged the request.

Vistra CEO Curt Morgan told analysts during a Friday conference call that the board’s proposal is “reasonable and fair” and he now expects a final outcome in April or May, after which the company could make decisions related to the future of its Illinois coal fleet.

The power producer has suggested it may shutter coal units in southern Illinois based on what executives view as inadequate capacity payments — payments made to ensure power plants are ready to run during periods of peak demand.

Morgan said Vistra is continuing work to “optimize” its Illinois portfolio and believes it can achieve a “reasonably significant” improvement in earnings from its Illinois plants. The company will be ready to act on that plan as soon as it gets an outcome from the Pollution Control Board.

“We’re going to be in a position to execute immediately,” Morgan said. “If the deal goes through the way it is now, we know what we would do. It’s just a matter of timing. But we also have been contingency planning, so if something else happened, then we would be prepared for that, as well.”

A possible wild card in the administrative rulemaking process? Politics.

Illinois voters will elect a governor tomorrow, and polls point to Democratic challenger J.B. Pritzker defeating incumbent Republican Bruce Rauner.

Pritzker earlier this year criticized the rule proposed at Vistra’s request by the Illinois EPA.

In response to a questionnaire sent to candidates by the Chicago Sun-Times, the Democrat said of the proposed MPS rule change: “I will stand on the side of science and reason and not scrap limits on pollution.”

But would a new governor, during his first months in office and facing a fiscal crisis, step in and derail an administrative rule initiated by his predecessor?

Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, one of the groups challenging Vistra’s petition, believes a Pritzker administration would reassess the state’s position on the rule proposal.

“You’re dealing with a proposal that came from the Illinois EPA,” he said.

While the board wouldn’t explicitly seek out a new governor’s stance before issuing a ruling, Learner said he believes this week’s election will provide important context for their decision.

“They’ll be interested to hear what [the administration’s] position is if a new governor is elected,” he said.

READ FULL STORY

Energy News Network: Illinois Pollution Board Proposes New Emissions Rules in Dynegy Coal Saga

Illinois pollution board proposes new emissions rules in Dynegy coal saga

By Kari Lydersen

The Illinois Pollution Control Board is taking public comments on an amended emissions rule for Dynegy’s coal plants in the state.

Last year, the pollution control board had put forth rules written by the Illinois EPA with much input — even line edits — from Dynegy itself, as emails and documents obtained by environmental groups showed.

Clean air advocates say the new proposed rules are better than those earlier ones but still do not do enough to limit pollution from the aging coal plants.

“They are lower than what Illinois EPA was proposing and lower than what Dynegy is asking for, but still significantly higher than what the company has emitted in recent years,” said James Gignac, lead Midwest energy analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The company Vistra, which acquired Dynegy this year, released a statement saying it supports the pollution control board’s proposal, which includes stricter emissions caps than those previously recommended but keeps intact what’s known as a mass-based approach, in which the company gets a flat, fleet-wide cap instead of one based on the amount of power generated, or a rate-based approach. The proposal also includes a measure ardently backed by clean air advocates: that when a plant closes or is “mothballed,” the emissions it had been allowed be removed from the total cap.

Clean air advocates say they feel they are now in a waiting game, with much hanging on the public comment period and how the board responds to comments, including whether it makes total emissions caps for the plants stricter.

Dirty and clean plants

Opponents of the mass-based approach fear it will let Dynegy continue running or ramp up its dirtier coal plants, while potentially closing or ramping down cleaner plants that are more expensive to run.

“Any plant under a mass-based approach can pollute more and another one can pollute less — it still means an older plant with less pollution control can up its emissions,” said Toba Pearlman, staff attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “[The recent proposal] is probably good for Vistra and bad for the people that live around the plants… We do think this is part of a larger strategy for Dynegy to squeeze Illinois for more money on their plants.”

The NRDC and Sierra Club in May released a report showing that Dynegy’s coal plants could close without affecting Illinois’ energy supply, noting the plants’ output could be replaced with renewable energy.

Vistra’s statement praised the latest proposal for allowing the company “the flexibility to assess and optimize its fleet of power plants to compete in the market.” It added that while Vistra’s subsidiary Luminant, which controls the plants, “supported the IEPA proposal, the company believes the IPCB proposal to be thoughtful and reasonable. Luminant will work constructively through the remainder of the process and looks forward to fully implementing the new standards.”

Dynegy acquired the five plants in 2013, with then-owner Ameren practically paying the company to take them off its hands. Since then Dynegy has worked on multiple fronts to try to keep the plants profitable, including a failed attempt to include supports in the 2016 Future Energy Jobs Act and an ongoing effort to change capacity market structures or switch markets, along with pushing for less stringent pollution requirements.

Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, noted that the pollution limits being amended have been on the books for a decade.

“They had plenty of time to adjust and retrofit their plants to come into compliance,” he said. “When Dynegy bought those plants, they knew what the standards were. And when Vistra bought Dynegy, they knew…but when the deadline came, they turned to a backroom deal.”

READ FULL STORY

 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Misguided New Oil & Gas Proposal Weakens Strong Methane Reduction Standards that Avoid Waste and Protect Public Health and Our Environment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

September 10, 2018

Contact:
Judith Nemes, Environmental Law & Policy Center, JNemes@elpc.org (312) 795-3706

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Misguided New Oil & Gas Proposal Weakens Strong Methane Reduction Standards that Avoid Waste and Protect Public Health and Our Environment   

STATEMENT BY HOWARD A. LEARNER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER

In response to the Trump Administration’s proposed rollback of existing methane waste reduction standards in connection with oil and gas drilling across the Midwest and the country, Environmental Law & Policy Center Executive Director Howard Learner said:

“The Administration’s ideology is trumping common sense methane reduction standards that avoid energy waste and protect the public and our environment from dangerous smog-forming pollution. The current standards call for the use of known technologies and good industry practices to reduce wasteful methane leaks. The new proposal would allow more methane leaks that harm human health and our climate, and waste energy resources.

“The existing EPA standards for new and modified sources of dangerous pollution in the oil and gas industry resulted from an extensive public process and include reasonable cost-effective measures that some companies are already using and some states are already requiring. One study concluded that compliance with the existing standards would generate nearly 5,400 jobs annually in leak detection to reduce emissions at covered facilities. The Trump Administration is again proposing to weaken a sensible federal standard that avoids energy waste and protects public health from smog and reduces harmful climate change pollution,” Learner said.

###

View the EPA’s proposal here.

Daily Herald: In Transit: App for Route 53 Extension Feedback Takes Flak

September 3, 2018

In Transit: App for Route 53 Extension Feedback Takes Flak 
By Marni Pyke

If the Founding Fathers had used Poll Everywhere at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia — would the final result be a better Constitution?

It might have depended on how fast they could type.

Illinois tollway consultants are using Poll Everywhere, a web-based audience participation system, at meetings with a group of local officials and others advising the agency on whether to extend Route 53 into Lake County.

The question has roiled Lake County for years, dividing residents over weighty problems like right of way, traffic, pollution and cost.

At a meeting Thursday, those divisions extended to use of the smartphone app to conduct the meeting, with some opponents of the new highway saying the technology is silencing their voices.

“I am extremely frustrated with how the tollway has engaged the stakeholders overall,” said Mayor Joseph Mancino of Hawthorn Woods, which could be bisected by a Route 53 extension. “Not only is the application unstable at best, it severely limits our input and quite frankly is a bit insulting to the stakeholders who are forced to use it.”

The tollway “wants to be able to parse through and say, ‘this is what people said,’ but that’s not what you do at a meeting where you want to have stakeholder participation,” stakeholder and Environmental Law and Policy Center chief Howard Learner said.

 

READ FULL ARTICLE

Detroit Free Press OpEd: President Trump’s War on the Great Lakes

 

August 30, 2018

President Trump’s War on the Great Lakes

OpEd

By Howard Learner

Summertime reminds us that the Great Lakes are a great natural treasure. Forty-two million people rely on this freshwater for safe drinking water supplies, but it’s more than that. The Great Lakes is where we live, work and play.

President Donald Trump doesn’t seem to get it. He won the 2016 election in the Great Lakes states, but Trump’s policy shifts and budget cuts amount to a war on the Great Lakes. The President’s budgets have proposed to zero-out or cut 90% of funding for the successful Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Congress has twice rejected those cuts and restored full funding of $300 million annually.

The Department of Commerce is proposing to cutting the acreage of the popular Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary in Lake Huron along the Alpena to Mackinaw City shoreline. The EPA is attempting to roll back common-sense Clean Water Act standards that protect safe clean drinking water. What is President Trump thinking?

Both Michigan Republican and Democratic leaders have publicly disagreed with these misguided proposals. So have business, civic and environmental groups. Protecting the Great Lakes is bipartisan and nonpartisan.

The Great Lakes are a global gem. They contain 21% of the planet’s fresh water supply and provide a rich aquatic habitat for many species. The Great Lakes support a $7 billion annual fishing industry, and draw tourists who support shoreline communities’ economies.
Military analysts say future wars will be fought over water. Fresh water availability is our region’s competitive advantage. We can’t afford to mess it up. So, why this war on the Great Lakes?

First, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is a common-sense program that supports shoreline and wetlands protection projects, keeping out invasive species and reducing harmful algae blooms. Congress has again rejected the President’s budget cuts and restored full funding for this important program. The White House’s response: a new Statement of Administration Policy opposing this funding. The bipartisan Congressional delegation and Governors strongly disagree.

Second, the Department of Commerce continues to “review” the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary, the nation’s only such freshwater preserve, and proposes to cut its size down by 90% from 4,300 to 448 square miles. Six Michigan Congress members wrote to Commerce Secretary
Ross explaining the economic, tourism and ecological value of this National Marine Sanctuary, which is a source of pride and income to northeast Michigan shoreline communities.

The Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary draws visitors to explore “Shipwreck Alley” where 100 ships rest on Lake Huron’s bottom, and learn about Great Lakes maritime history. It’s not controversial. Gov. Snyder formally requested that Secretary Ross end the review and leave the Sanctuary boundaries alone, but the Secretary denied that request. Under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, an adjacent state’s governor can veto a boundary change. Gov. Snyder should publicly announce that he’ll do so, and call on governor candidates Schuette and Whitmer to agree.

Third, the Trump EPA is rushing to rollback clean water standards that protect safe drinking water and preserve fish and wildlife habitat. Likewise, in federal court, the EPA is resisting sensible regulatory standards to reduce agricultural runoff pollution that causes toxic blue-green algae blooms in Lake Erie, which threaten drinking water for 500,000 people in the Toledo area and harm commercial fisheries.

Good policy is good politics. The battle for Great Lakes protection is well worth fighting for and winning, but it shouldn’t have to be fought. The public and wise political leaders know better

READ OpEd HERE

Chicago Tonight: How Healthy is Lake Michigan? A Checkup on the Great Lakes

How Healthy is Lake Michigan? A Checkup on the Great Lakes
By Nicole Cardos

When it comes to the health and maintenance of Lake Michigan, some environmentalists, property owners and even surfers have expressed their concerns.

Some of those concerns: toxins, the Foxconn deal in Kenosha and rising lake levels.

“Last year, the amount of water released from Lake Superior into lakes Michigan and Huron was the highest in 32 years,” the story states.

But that transfer of water is also due to the fact that Lake Superior is geographically higher than lakes Michigan and Huron, said Howard Learner, president and executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center. On top of that, Lake Michigan is self-contained.

“Huron has an outlet and water makes its way to Erie,” Learner said. “Michigan is a big bathtub.”

WATCH VIDEO CLIP

Cleveland.com: FES Nuclear Decommissioning Funds Inadequate, Consumer Groups Tell NRC

June 19, 2018
FES Nuclear Decommissioning Funds Inadequate, Consumer Groups Tell NRC
By John Funk, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio — The trust funds that FirstEnergy created years ago to pay for the demolition of its nuclear power plants and clean-up are no longer adequate, a coalition of consumer and environmental groups is arguing today at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Citing research done by an independent investment consulting company, lawyers for the Midwest-based Environmental Law and Policy Center and a veteran nuclear reactor expert have petitioned the NRC to take another look at the trust funds.

The NRC’s Petition Review Board is not expected to make a decision on the ELPC request immediately, said an agency spokesman.

The ELPC is arguing that as of Dec. 31, 2016, the trust funds were nearly $2.75 billion short. That’s the last publicly available decommissioning fund data.

And that date was before FENOC and plant owner FirstEnergy Solutions filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection from creditors who were owed more than an estimated $2 billion on March 31 of this year.

Still, on April 4, the NRC issued a statement declaring that the company’s decommissioning funds met NRC regulations.

A spokesman for FES/FENOC had no comment, other than to cite the April 4 NRC statement.

Howard Learner, a lawyer and executive director of the ELPC, said the announced shutdown of the power plants by 2021 means the funds will have even less time to grow before they are needed to pay for decommissioning.

He said the shortfall will probably mean that the company will delay decommissioning the reactors after it shuts them down and instead move them into an NRC category called SAFSTOR.

READ FULL STORY

Chicago Tribune: Environmentalists Appeal Ruling on Illiana Toll Road

June 13. 2018
Environmentalists Appeal Ruling on Illiana Toll Road
By Susan DeMar Lafferty

Environmental groups filed a petition to ask the Illinois Appellate Court to reconsider its recent ruling against them regarding the proposed Illiana toll road.

According to the appeal this week, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Illinois Department of Transportation failed to comply with the language of the Illinois Regional Planning Act, which states that the CMAP Board “shall” provide its “prior” “approval” of a transportation project before final approval by the MPO.

Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, who is representing Openlands and the Sierra Club, cited several other court cases to support their claim that the word “shall” is mandatory, not discretionary, as the court ruled.

The Illiana, a proposed 47-mile toll road connecting I-55 in Wilmington to I-65 near Lowell, Indiana, has been a controversial road project that was shelved by Gov. Bruce Rauner when he took office in January, 2015.

Environmentalists have opposed the toll road project, saying it would harm the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie since the proposed route skirted its southern border, and calling it a “financial boondoggle” for the state.

In 2013 and 2014, IDOT sought to amend the “GO TO 2040” long range transportation plan to include the Illiana Tollway project and it had been debated by both CMAP and MPO at that time, with CMAP twice opposed to including the amendment in its 2040 plan and MPO supporting it.

Environmentalists filed the initial lawsuit in 2014, challenging the approval process for including the Illiana in the “GO TO 2040” plan.

According to the recent court petition, federal law requires that transportation projects must be approved by the MPO before they become eligible for federal funding.

CMAP was created by the Illinois General Assembly in the Illinois Regional Planning Act to ensure that transportation planning for the Chicago area is carried out in conjunction with comprehensive planning for land use, economic development, environmental sustainability and quality-of-life issues, the petition stated.

The act specifically states that the CMAP board “shall” first provide its “prior” “approval” of transportation projects and plans before the final approval by the MPO Policy Committee, according to the court document.

In the petition for a rehearing, Learner cited several cases in which the court ruled that “shall” means mandatory, not discretionary.

The Illinois Supreme Court is now hearing Oswald verse Beard, and that case should also define the meaning of “shall,” according to Learner.

“The Illinois General Assembly clearly intended to create a nondiscretionary, mandatory duty” when it wrote the Regional Planning Act, the petition stated.

On the other hand, the word “may” is used numerous times throughout the act, making the contrast “clear and easily discerned,” the document stated.

The appellate court “misconstrued the relationship” between CMAP Board and MPO and the nature of the GO TO 2040 Plan and the Illiana Tollway, it said.

“The entire purpose of GO TO 2040 as a regional comprehensive plan would be negated” if the MPO were able to push through projects “inconsistent with the other planning purposes of GO TO 2040,” the court document stated.

In the petition, Learner asked for a rehearing, or as an alternative, hold this request for a rehearing until after the state supreme court issues a ruling in Oswald verse Beard.

READ MORE

Toledo Blade: Judge Slams EPA for Lake Erie Impairment Controversy

April 11, 2018
Judge Slams EPA Over Lake Erie Impairment Controversy
By Tom Henry

In a decision hailed by environmental advocates as a major victory for clean drinking water, Senior U.S. District Judge James G. Carr accused the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency of botching the Lake Erie impairment controversy and, at one point, went so far as to say the federal agency demonstrated a “whiff of bad faith.”

The judge’s 25-page order, filed in Toledo on Wednesday night, gives the U.S. EPA 30 days to reconsider its failure to challenge the Ohio EPA’s controversial Oct. 20, 2016, finding that the open water of western Lake Erie did not meet criteria the state agency believed was necessary under the Clean Water Act to be designated as impaired.

An algae bloom from Lake Erie appears in the boat basin at International Park in Toledo in 2017.

The U.S. EPA accepted the state’s finding last year, first without formally acting on it.

Then, two days after it was sued by the Chicago-based Environmental Law & Policy Center and Toledo-based Advocates for a Clean Lake Erie last May, the federal agency passed the report through its administrative process but said it was deferring to the state of Ohio’s judgment not to list the open water as impaired.

The two groups sued, claiming the U.S. EPA missed an important deadline and failed to make a final decision one way or the other. In his ruling, Judge Carr agreed that’s not good enough and remanded the case back to the federal agency.

Although the Kasich administration finally did an about-face after years of resistance on behalf of agriculture by declaring the western basin impaired on March 22, the lawsuit remains active because it is focused on the U.S. EPA’s actions as a regulator. Judge Carr said he will continue to “retain jurisdiction over this suit and all matters affecting it.”

Lake Erie’s western basin has been plagued by chronic bouts of algae toxic enough to make people sick or possibly even die since 1995. The impairment controversy has drawn a lot of attention, because the designation allows for unprecedented controls on sources of algae-forming pollution, which today is primarily agricultural runoff.

“Ohio’s persistent failures came to a head in 2016,” according to Judge Carr’s order, which said the state’s reluctance to declare western Lake Erie as impaired goes back to at least 2012. That’s two years before Toledo’s high-profile 2014 water crisis, when the city’s tap water was so fouled by an algal toxin that the metro area’s 500,000 residents were told by health officials to avoid it for almost three days.

The state agency could have made the declaration in biennial reports submitted in 2012, 2014, or 2016, but its “rebuke put the U.S. EPA in a difficult position,” the judge wrote.

While stating the federal agency “had, in effect, given Ohio a pass,” the judge also wrote that Ohio ignored its “opportunity and its duties” as a regulator. Judge Carr further stated that the U.S. EPA compounded Ohio’s inaction with more inaction by failing to act on the state’s 2016 report for nearly five months. The judge wrote that lack of oversight occurred despite Ohio’s “unmistakable failure to do what it promised the U.S. EPA it would do after 2014.”

He seemed particularly upset by the U.S. EPA waiting until a federal holiday — Jan. 15, Martin Luther King, Jr., Day and one day before his Jan. 16 deadline for motions — to tell the Ohio EPA in writing it was having second thoughts about the state’s refusal up to that point to declare western Lake Erie impaired.

Judge Carr said he was never notified — formally or informally — by the U.S. EPA, and heard about the new development in a roundabout way, from a clerk who passed down word from the ELPC.

“Defendants’ oversight amplifies the whiff of bad faith arising from the timing of its inexplicably delayed notice to plaintiffs’ counsel,” he wrote.

The judge also said he recognizes that farm runoff is much more complicated than sewage discharges and other point sources. In his decision, he noted that U.S. EPA counsel stated during oral arguments that meaningful reductions in farm runoff could take eight to 23 years.

Howard Learner, ELPC executive director, said he was impressed by the tone of Judge Carr’s remarks.

He said the judge called out both agencies for “bad faith and procedural maneuverings” and said the Ohio EPA “has dodged and weaved its statutory obligations over the years.”

“The judge, in effect, is saying ‘Quit playing games,’” Mr. Learner said. “This is a good day for the public and a good day for safe, clean drinking water.”

Mike Ferner, ACLE founder, said he hopes Judge Carr retains jurisdiction for a long time.

The U.S. EPA and the Ohio EPA declined comment. Both agencies said they are still reviewing the order.

READ MORE

Wall Street Journal: Researchers Race to Thwart Toxic Algae Outbreaks

April 7, 2018
Researchers Race to Thwart Toxic Algae Outbreaks
By Kris Maher

Ed Weinberg thinks he has developed the best way to stop the toxic blooms of blue-green algae that have been fouling bodies of water from the Florida Everglades to the Great Lakes and beyond.

The algae feed on phosphorus from farms and wastewater treatment plants that makes its way into rivers and lakes. Mr. Weinberg’s solution deploys tiny beads of engineered resin that can absorb the mineral from water and extract it for reuse.

“It’s simple yet elegant chemistry,” said Mr. Weinberg, a chemical engineer who is among the finalists in a $10 million competition that is one of a number of both public and private efforts to solve a growing problem in U.S. waterways.

Researchers are racing to find solutions to outbreaks of blue-green algae that are increasing in frequency and severity. Carpets of stinking algae have sickened people and animals and hurt the fishing and tourism industries.

In 2014, the drinking water for nearly half a million people in Toledo, Ohio, was contaminated by the toxin microcystin produced by the algae.

“When you’re dealing with an issue as large and complex as we are right now, the more solutions the better,” said Christopher Winslow, who coordinates federal- and state-funded research into algal blooms at Ohio State University. He isn’t involved in the competition, which is privately run.

So far, research has been focused in four main areas, Mr. Winslow said: removing toxins from water, understanding how toxins affect the human body, understanding how blooms grow and preventing blooms in the first place.

Stopping the blooms is taking on more urgency. In March, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a plan to meet a goal of cutting phosphorus entering Lake Erie by 40% through voluntary efforts by 2025. Also last month, Ohio declared the shallow western basin of Lake Erie “impaired,” a step toward tighter regulations of phosphorus from farms and wastewater plants.

Algal blooms in Lake Erie were a problem in the 1960s. The blooms faded after regulations were implemented that required wastewater treatment plants to cut phosphorus.

But in the mid-1990s the blooms returned, and they have been surging more recently. Today, scientists point to farm runoff as a major cause of blooms.

For Lake Erie, the Maumee and Sandusky rivers are the greatest contributors of phosphorus, with 87% of phosphorus coming from sources that include farms. Environmental groups want tighter limits on use of fertilizer, which typically contains phosphorus.

“It’s time for the foot-dragging to come to an end,” said Howard Learner, president of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, based in Chicago, which sued the state of Ohio in federal court last year, arguing it should declare Lake Erie impaired. A ruling in that case is pending. “We know what causes it. It’s manure and excess fertilizer.”

Joe Cornely, a spokesman for the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, said farmers are already taking steps to manage fertilizer more effectively. “We recognize that more needs to be done,” he said. “Our approach is, as soon as we figure out something that we know is going to work, let’s take that step.”

Researchers are exploring a variety of solutions. Some are working on ways to remove phosphorus from manure directly. Others are testing materials that could be inserted in drainage tiles under the soil on farms to remove phosphorus before it reaches rivers.

Mr. Weinberg, a 66-year-old from Richboro, Pa., outside Philadelphia, wanted a site with plenty of manure to test his technology last fall. He found a horse farm in Maryland with a pond thick with algae. He filled burlap sacks with his beads and put them in open crates, creating a makeshift filter in a drainage creek that flowed into the Chesapeake Bay.

He said he was able to replicate his lab results for removing phosphorus, and said there is no reason his technology couldn’t be applied at commercial farms in Ohio where phosphorus eventually makes its way into Lake Erie.

The competition in which he is a finalist is offering a $10 million prize for the best phosphorus-removal technology. It is sponsored by the nonprofit Everglades Foundation and the Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation, a charitable organization affiliated with the fertilizer company.

The numbers of teams competing have been winnowed from more than 100 from 13 countries, to 10 from the U.S., Canada, the Netherlands and China, according to officials working on the competition.

ELPC’s Founding Vision is Becoming Today’s Sustainability Reality

Support ELPC’s Next 25 Years of Successful Advocacy

Donate Now