Massive plow may bring Lake Apopka back to life

Kevin Spear
Orlando Sentinel Staff Writer
April 27, 2008

ZELLWOOD

One of the world's largest farm tractors is plowing under soil laced with pesticides along Lake Apopka, where a decade ago an attempt to turn former farms into wetlands brought disaster.

State water managers think an enormous plow will render nearly 5 square miles of contaminated cropland safe for flooding, an essential step to reviving one of the sickest large lakes in Florida.

The first try at converting the farmland into marsh failed in 1998. It killed more than 1,000 eagles, storks, pelicans and other birds that ate fish which had become toxic with pesticides seeping out of the soil.

The giant tractor will put the deadly dirt far out of reach, state officials say, while adding $7 million to restoration costs already exceeding $115 million.

"We are turning the soil 180 degrees, bringing up bottom soil and putting it on top of the topsoil," said Johnny Allen of Roscoe, Texas, who was hired to do the work.

At 35 tons, 40 feet long, 12 feet tall and powered by a 600-horsepower diesel engine, the tractor plow that Allen brought to Lake Apopka is as much earthquake as earth tiller. It rolls not on tires but on rubber tracks 30 inches wide. That's so it floats over muck that a person walking across would sink through.

Combining heavyweight power with light footing gives it the ability to slog into sloppy soil and still pull four plow disks that are 52 inches across. Despite their extraordinary size, the circular blades slice Apopka fields as easily as if it were chocolate cake.

Scientists figure the top foot of soil harbors most of the dangerous residues from DDT and other now-banned pesticides. With that in mind, the disks were designed to gouge up clean dirt from 3 feet deep, shove it to the surface and dump toxic topsoil into the void.

Every dozen feet, the disks plow enough ground to fill a large dump truck.

"It'll blow your mind when you figure out how much dirt we turn," said Allen, who put the amount at hundreds of tons a minute.

For the past quarter-century, Allen has coupled some of the world's largest tractors with some of the largest plows, which he hand-builds, to take on the stubborn clay of the Texas Panhandle region. The machine he brought to Lake Apopka is his most massive yet.

Still, it's tedious plowing, hindered by outcrops of limestone, equipment breakdowns and getting stuck. When that happens, the extended Allen family rolls in with an armada of slightly lesser tractors to yank the stranded beast out of its quagmire.

Allen hopes to plow 20 acres a day. It's an expensive process but still much cheaper than digging up and hauling away the thousands of acres of contaminated dirt.

Allen's crew also must grade, smooth and compact the ground, requiring, in all, a dozen passes by tractors. Such a pace, coupled with weather delays and trips to Texas, could keep them turning the dirt of Lake Apopka's shore for nearly two years.

When it comes to restoration of Lake Apopka, the state's fourth-largest lake, time passes at its own pace.

Since the 1980s, the state has bought 20,000 acres of farmland along the 50-square-mile lake in Lake and Orange counties. The goal was to stop and undo damage from decades of farms pumping their dirty runoff into Lake Apopka.

The practice killed the lake as a fishing and natural paradise and fed uncontrollable algae that turned Apopka a vivid green.

By late 1998, the last of the farms were bought, flooded and thought to be on their way to becoming marsh that would help cleanse the lake.

Yet that turned horrific when authorities began to discover birds either dead or in the final stages of acute pesticide poisoning. For years afterward, the threat of federal prosecution and lack of scientific understanding of the bird kill all but shut down restoration.

Now, at least work is under way, relieved officials say.

"It's really pretty exciting because after all these years we're getting close to flooding again," said Dave Walker, a restoration project manager.

For Allen, the Lake Apopka job isn't so unusual. His tractors also have plowed soil oozing with oil and mining sites laced with arsenic. Yet, he's envious of Apopka's rich dirt.

"You could grow anything in it," said Allen, who would like to plant a crop or two but recognizes Florida's investment in a new future for the former farmland.

"When we're done here, it won't have any pesticide, herbicide or any kind of contamination in it," he said.

Kevin Spear can be reached at kspear@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5062.
 

 


Which alternative fuel is next?

 

Will ''alternative'' energy ever dethrone oil as the king of fuels?

That question came more than 150 years ago, when the king of fuels was oil -- whale oil. Back then, Nantucket and New Bedford were the Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi of whale oil production. People once thought that it would last forever.

It doesn't take an economist to notice the rumblings of historic change pushing close to the surface once again. Demand for oil is growing faster than supplies and so, oil prices reach dizzying new highs day after day. If this trend continues, much will have to change -- not just in America, but everywhere. Americans use far more oil than anyone else, but China and India and the rest of the planet need fuel to pull their populations out of poverty. Every day that demand increases without a corresponding increase in supply, the potential for serious social disruptions grows more intense.

Driving, building, growing

Is there any way to avoid an oilinduced social cataclysm?

Back in 1843, when talk of finding alternatives worried the whaling industry, The Nantucket Inquirer calmed its whale-wealthy readers. ''Great noise is made by many of the newspapers and thousands of the traders in the country about Lard oil, Chemical Oil, Camphene Oil, and a half dozen other luminous humbugs,'' mocked a writer. Have no fear, he advised. ``Let not our envious . . . opponents indulge themselves in any such dreams.''

Moby Dick aside, whales by the thousands met their demise at the point of the spear of a whaling industry thoroughly dominated by Americans. The whales started to find respite only after the unexpected discovery of thick and plentiful oil just below the ground. The new black blubber proved a problematic, if highly profitable, way to power the world.

Before long, petroleum relegated the use of whale oil for lighting street lamps to a quaint memory kept alive by novelists and Hollywood period-piece designers. The new fuel kept us driving and building and growing. But it also contaminated our world and transferred mountains of money to the dangerous despots all of us strengthen today every time we fill up our tank -- even the tank of a guilt-reducing, fuel-efficient hybrid.

Find another way

Calls to find an alternative to polluting hydrocarbons are nothing new. For decades environmentalists urged us to find another way, shouting mostly into the wind. But much has changed lately.

The best news for the planet -- if not for many of its inhabitants -- came when oil started soaring to these painful heights. Suddenly, tree-huggers, political strategists and worried consumers faced the same enemy. And that enemy has now become the mother of invention.

Even those who dismiss conservation as little more than an unremarkable ''virtue,'' as Vice President Dick Cheney once described it, now agree we need another way.

Global warming skeptics may not worry about the planet, but they worry about the transfer of wealth from consumers everywhere to unpredictable dictators in oil-rich nations. And those who care little about politics or the environment fret about their ability to pay for a tank of gas. Carmakers worry about our waning enthusiasm for road travel, while airlines gaze anxiously at disappearing profit margins. It's a perfect storm for alternative energy.

The storm is about to become even more violent. In 2006, the world's top oil consumer was the United States, at 20 million barrels of oil per day. China was second at seven million. By 2015, based on conservative estimates, China's consumption will rise by 60 percent.

Diverting food to fuel

India will soon start production of the Nano, the world's cheapest car, selling for $2,500. Goldman Sachs estimates that by 2050, the number of cars in China and India will rise to 1.1 billion from 20 million.

Our efforts to find alternatives are already causing terrible problems. America's misguided, pollution-producing ethanol program is diverting food to fuel, contributing to the food riots spreading around the world. But the profit motive will eventually bring results.

Crucially, sound government policy can play a major role in accelerating the arrival of a solution, just as bad policy can delay it.

Fantastic profits await the entrepreneurs who find a way to dethrone petroleum and turn Saudi Arabia into an energy player to rival today's Nantucket. One day, petroleum will join whale oil in the history books. That's the good news. The bad news is that we don't know when that day will come.

Frida Ghitis writes on global affairs.


What in the world are we doing to save the Earth?

Bradenton Herald
Sunday April 27th 2008

Good morning, it's Sunday, April 27. And how are you feeling today about your planet?

Another Earth Day has come and gone, and with it a chance to reflect on what we're doing - or not - to preserve God's green earth.

There are encouraging signs that suggest we're taking this seriously. We've been recycling for years, we're now using more energy-efficient lighting and we're beginning to eschew plastic bags at the supermarket for re-useable cloth totes. Manufacturers are making products that are more energy and water efficient. We're waiting in line to buy fuel-efficient hybrid cars.

The Herald published an Earth Day story about Village of the Arts gallery owners Kevin Webb and Diane Montrose, who are transforming trash and found objects into their art. They've recycled everything from suitcases, birdcages and roller-skates to plastic and small toys for their work.

All these efforts count toward the preservation of our planet and are worth celebrating. But are we just scratching the surface? Will it be enough?

Satirical novelist Kurt Vonnegut Jr., who passed away a year ago, once suggested the following message be carved into the walls of the Grand Canyon for the aliens who'll be arriving in flying saucers to survey our demise:

"We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard . . . and too damn cheap."

It is difficult to fathom why it has taken us so long to embrace the green concept. It was 38 years ago when Wisconsin Sen. Gaylord Nelson, dismayed by government's ignorance of environmental issues, fostered the notion of a day to focus on the plight of our planet.

America is one of the world's worst polluters, yet our government has been dragging its heels for years over the environment. We managed to enact the Clean Air Act in 1970 and the Clean Water Act in 1977, and we continue to tinker with fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles. The dossier is not that impressive, and nothing has come easy.

I'm not sure Al Gore deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for "An Inconvenient Truth" but if the Oscar-winning documentary helped raise world awareness about global warming, he deserves more than a pat on the back. We've spent far too much time arguing over the very existence of global warning, and not enough time seeking solutions to repair or allay environmental damage.

We've been warned by a U.N. panel that global carbon emissions must begin to drop by 2015 or we risk catastrophic climate change. Yet President Bush, who balked at the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases after he took office, recently gave the U.S. a deadline of 2025. You've probably already figured out I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty sure those extra 10 years without mandated limits would not be kind ones to Mother Earth.

Our three leading presidential candidates all appear to be more supportive of the environment than the current administration. (It is, after all, an election year). It will be interesting to see who among them might raise the topic above the level of campaign rhetoric.

Meanwhile, we can keep plugging away. It's all right to feel good about the efforts we're making, but it's a long haul until Earth Day 2009. We shouldn't wait 365 more revolutions around the sun for our next move.

Jim Smith is managing editor of the Bradenton Herald. He and Executive Editor Joan Krauter (jkrauter@bradenton.com) write a "Letter from the Editor" on Sundays.

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Jim Smith x jsmith@bradenton.com