Edith Chase–In Memoriam

 It grieves me to let you know that Edith Chase passed away on June 13, 2017. Edith was an award-winning scientist, activist and public official who lived in Franklin Township near Kent for a very long time. As a life member of both KEC and the League of Women Voters and for her numerous other community efforts, she will be missed by many.

She retired and moved to Ithaca, New York, at age 90 in 2014 to live near her daughter because of declining health.   Many environmentalists in Kent, throughout Ohio and nationally will miss her. She not only identified environmental issues, but she also worked tirelessly to correct the problems and was frequently successful. We will miss her quiet manner and smile, her generous nature, her probing questions, her grasp of the facts, and her “green” heart. Faye Ann Sebaly, in an email, expressed the hope that we can follow in her spirit of caring for our world and continue with the same integrity. Thanks, Edith, for leading the way.

Condolences may be sent to Edith’s son, Richard Chase, at P.O. Box 433, Princeton, MA  01541-0433.

Her Career:

Edith earned her bachelor of science degree in chemistry from Antioch College. She then returned to her family home in Minneapolis and earned a master of science degree in chemistry at the University of Minnesota. Edith was employed as a chemist at Merck & Co. Pharmaceuticals in New Jersey, where she met and subsequently married Richard Chase. They moved to Franklin Township in 1958.

While raising two children, Edith became active in the League of Women Voters of Kent and focused her scientific expertise on water quality public policy for the Cuyahoga River and Lake Erie. She was a founding member of the Kent Environmental Council in 1970 and continued to participate in the League of Women Voters of Kent for more than 50 years. Edith helped to establish and subsequently chaired the Lake Erie Basin Policy Conference of the League of Women Voters.

Recognized nationally, Edith was a writer and editor of scientific papers published by the Hydrology Section of the United States Geological Survey from 1979 to 1994. Recognized across Ohio, Edith was invited to become one of the founding members of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council when that council was organized by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources in 1982 and served for several years as chairperson of the council.

Acting locally, Edith was Franklin Township zoning inspector for 15 years. In that office, in 1989, she created one of the first hydrology studies of the effects of oil drilling on groundwater and devised a method for monitoring well hydrology that was used by local governments until the Ohio General Assembly restricted that authority to the ODNR in 2004.

In 2005, the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration awarded to Edith the Walter B. Jones Memorial Award for Coastal Steward of the Year. Edith also received the Burning River Foundation’s 2014 award for Outstanding Environmental Leader, an honor previously awarded to United States Senators Sherrod Brown and George Voinovich.

After Edith moved to Ithaca, KEC and the League of Women Voters formed the Edith Chase Symposium Committee, which just completed its third annual event. Edith remained a part of the planning of this event for those three years and was proud of what it was accomplishing in educating the public. To find out more or to donate, go to http://www.edithchasesymposium.org.


2014 – Outstanding Environmental Leader Award from the Burning River Foundation

2013 – Lifetime Achievement Award from the Portage Parks Foundation

2005 – Coastal Steward of the Year Walter B. Jones Memorial Award from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

2005 – Grassroots Citizen Advocate Award from Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat Network

1995 – Lake Erie Award for individual stewardship from the State of Ohio Lake Erie Commission Legacy Club Member, Ohio Environmental Council

Life Member, Kent Environmental Council

Life Member, League of Women Voters of Kent

–Lorraine McCarty

Recovering and Recycling Cuyahoga River Sediments: An Alternative to Disposal

river sediment

The activities in a lake such as Lake Erie are controlled in part by what happens in the watershed. Losses from the land are gained by the lake, for better or for worse–often to the detriment of organisms living in the lake. Nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus that contain compounds from agricultural and residential fertilizers, along with toxic materials such as industrial wastes (e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs) and human hygienic products (e.g., endocrine disrupting estrogen agonists and antagonists) enter lakes largely through riverine inputs, often exacerbated by rainstorms and snowmelt runoff. Also, ecosystem managers need to consider particulate materials, which consist largely of soil particles (i.e., sand, silts, and clays) carried along with flowing water and which may turn into sediment at the bottom of a lake when the flow decreases at the mouth of a river or after entry to a lake.

Although point sources such as pipes from a sewage treatment plant or local industry can be feeders of pollutants to a river, much of point-source pollution is now regulated to prevent large inputs to receiving waters. The major source of pollutants now is from nonpoint sources such as runoff from residential yards and agricultural fields. When runoff occurs from these nonpoint sources, generally it comes as a mix of dissolved and particulate materials. Although most nutrients and many toxic materials are soluble in water, they often are attached to the surface of sediments when they enter a stream or river, complicating the management picture.

Which sediments are worst for holding unwanted materials? Recall from geometry that as the radius of a sphere gets smaller, the ratio of surface area to volume gets larger. So the surfaces of smaller particles (e.g., clays) are proportionately much more coated with nutrient and toxic materials than the larger sand particles. This means that sediments of different sizes can be and need to be managed differently.
river sediment 2
Until recently, eroded sediments were treated as a nuisance, filling up harbors at the mouth of rivers and requiring dredging to keep those ports open for commerce. The Cuyahoga River fills its navigation channel with eight to ten feet of sediment each year, requiring the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to dredge it to maintain shipping access up six miles to the ArcelorMittal steel company. To be exact, the corp dredges 225,000 cubic yards of sediment at great expense to public funds, whether state or federal.

Recent advances in technology have begun to turn bane into bonanza. The Port of Cleveland in partnership with Kurtz Bros., Inc. has been harvesting sand five miles upstream of ArcelorMittal using a sand interceptor that collects sand from the river and deposits it along the riverbank, where it is delivered to trucks and sold for construction, soil conditioning, and stream and beach reconstruction. It is then dried and sorted by size. Because it is collected above most industrial activities, it is sufficiently clean for reuse. It is estimated that with expansion of its capabilities, the sand interceptor may be able to reduce sediment loads to the port by 20%. The interceptor was funded with $1.2 million by the Ohio Healthy Lake Erie Fund. Independent research conducted at the University of Akron and verified by the Ohio EPA found that the material met state and federal standards for cleanliness.

But what about the sediments that are not collected by the sand interceptor? Aren’t those the materials most likely to have hazardous materials adhering to them? Sediments dredged from the mouth of the Cuyahoga River are now placed in a confined disposal facility (CDF) at the eastern end of Burke Lakefront Airport. This is a special experimental CDF that is administered by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Office of Coastal Management. It is constructed as a series of pools through which sediment slurries pass. The sediment material gradually sinks to the bottom, leaving the water to pass back into the shipping channel in a process called dewatering the sediment. Over time, the sediment consolidates, with the larger, heavier materials settling in the first pond and lighter sediments settling in later pools. Bacterial and fungal activities gradually will decompose the toxic materials (e.g., PCBs and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs). In the meantime, small amounts of these dewatered sediments can be combined with other materials and used in soil mixes. The Ohio EPA tests the mixes to ensure that they meet state and federal standards for safety. Once again, these soil mixes are made through the public-private partnership between the state and Kurtz Bros.

Through these innovative measures, sediment no longer need to be considered something to be disposed of; instead, sediment can be considered to be a valuable resource that can be recycled and marketed. It is something to think about and to carefully consider as the next wave of environmental protection: making the environment safe by making it profitable. Time will tell whether this is a valuable direction, especially given the current political aversion to making sweeping environmental regulations.

–Bob Heath

Community Solar

Solar Presentation

Luke Selfridge, Program Director from OHSun, presented his organizations approach to helping residents and small businesses obtain solar.  OHSun is a 501 (c) 3 that partners with local non-profits to present to the public the opportunity to bring solar electric panels to their communities. They are principally funded thru grants and fixed installer fees.  They have worked with municipalities in Ashtabula, Athens, Lorain, and Cleveland.  At the KEC Annual Meeting, the standing-room-only crowd of 50 was extremely interested in the information.

General Notes on Solar

Solar is very viable in Ohio.  Ohio has about 4.5 to 5 hours of available light daily.  While Florida has more light, the panels operate best in cool weather (such as our spring or fall, so we actually have an advantage over sunnier  states that are also hotter.

  • Solar voltaic cells are still 80% efficient after 25 year.  They are covered with hail-proof, wind-proof, sealed glass.  No snow removal is necessary.
  • They are usually 3’-6” by 5’-0” and supported on a roof by aluminum racks.
  • They can be mounted on just about any roof type – slate shingles being more problematic but still possible.
  • True south facing roofs are no longer necessary for satisfactory performance—with east and west facing roofs performing at only 10% less efficiency, and the number of panels used can be adjusted to accommodate  the directional challenge.
  • Ground mounted systems are also available but are slightly more expensive do to the cost of a “foundation” for the frame-work.
  • The average home requires approximately 200 s.f. of solar panels but this may vary greatly depending on demand.

How Solar Systems Work

  • When sunlight hits the solar cells, energy is created and conducted by a cable.  Power is produced in Direct Current and requires an inverter (which looks somewhat like a flat fuse box) to convert to Alternating Current. The cable then feeds this electricity to the house.
  • Inverter types include: central or string .  String inverters are large commercial grade inverters which convert electricity from multiple arrays and are not generally appropriate for use in residential projects.
  • Most systems are connected to the grid to assure uninterrupted performance and excess production is then supplied to the grid for consumer credit.
  • March and April produce peak performance in Ohio due to the efficiency of weather related cooling of the panels.
  • The inverter system is required to shut down the system in the event of a grid shut-down to prevent back feeding and potential injury to utility line workers.
  • This means that although a house is solar powered, its electricity will go off with all the other houses. A “SunnyBoy Inverter” is a device that prevents the house from sending power back into the grid when it is down but still allows solar power to flow to the house, but it is expensive, and most people do not opt for this additional device.
  • Batteries are required for back-up to produce 24/7 performance if not connected to the grid or for full solar reliance.  The batteries are big, expensive and need to be replaced every 10-15 years, so most people do not opt for them.
  • In older solar systems, if one panel went down or became shaded, all remaining panels would shut down, but this is no longer an issue. Modern installations  utilize an “optimizer” to prevent this type of shut down.

How the solar cooperative works:

OHSun does presentations such as the one sponsored by KEC on February 27th, of this year. A core group of interested people develops. Within a few months, if enough people show interest a co-op group can be formed.  The ideal number to be most cost effective is 100 homes or small businesses but the co-op group can be much smaller.

The process is as follows:

Full implementation of the process generally takes 4 – 8 months but could take up to a year depending on a number of factors including group process and installer availability. The following is a basic outline of the process:

  1. Information meeting
  2. Join the co-op
  3. Grow the co-op…tell your neighbors
  4. Schedule a site visit with installer

a. Co-op members choose a smaller selection committee

b. Co-op gets bids from installers

c. Co-op committee chooses an installer

  1. Contracts are signed
  2. Panels are installed
  3. Enjoy

OHSun brings regional installers into the picture, each with its own specifications. OHSun vets the installers and prepares a Excel spread sheet that includes all aspects of the bidding installers so that the co-op selection committee can make the best comparisons possible.  These would include criteria such as the price of panels, quality of panels, density of cells in panels, types of racks, labor, time required for installation, differences depending on roof types, the type of equipment used, company history, the company’s hiring practices, installer certification, references, etc.

This is a buying coop and does not involve any sharing of the produced power.  This co-op model doesn’t require strict geographic unity (For example, homes from Summit and Lake Counties joined the Cleveland co-op.  The advantages of the co-op system Include:

  • Camaraderie
  • Collective knowledge
  • Cost savings through group buying power


  • The cost of solar installation has dropped by 90% since the 1970’s.
  • Purchasing solar panels through OHSun cooperatives typically saves consumers 10-20% over the cost of an individual purchase.
  • A monthly fee is charged by utility providers to connect to the grid—from $8 to $23 a month, based on what OHSun has seen in other areas.
  • In reality solar electric production benefits all rate payers as it affords local production of alternative energy.  Ohio allows for net metering.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_metering.
  • An important metric is cost per watt.
  • 3 Kilowatt systems are the smallest desirable to the installer.  An average system is 7 Kilowatts and the panels for a system this size cover about 200 square feet of roof.
  • An array of four panels creates 1 kilowatt of power per hour.
  • Federal tax credits are available and rebates about 30% of the cost.
  • Eco-Link offers reduced interest rates for the installation of solar panels. http://www.tos.ohio.gov/ecolink_homeowners
  • The national Unitarian Universalist Church also sponsors low interest rate loans.
  • The average home cost for an installed system would be somewhere between $5,826  (a 3 KW system) and $17,478 (a 9 KW system), after all discounts, tax credits and the annual savings on electricity are deducted.

For more information see the OHSun website ( http://www.ohsun.org), or contact Luke Selfridge at solarteam@ohsun.org.


Submitted by Brad Brotje and Mary Greer

Grant Winners Announced!

Kent Environmental Council Awards $3,035.84 in Local Grants

Kent Environmental Council has awarded $3,035.84 in “Legacy for the Environment” Grants, which are aimed at improving the environment in Portage County.  The following requests were awarded:

Portage County Master Gardeners—$650 to present a workshop teaching 50 participants the importance of composting for the environment, how to compost. and how to use the compost in the garden. A reference book and kitchen bucket will be provided to each participant.  Follow up with participants to survey their use and results.  Portage Soil and Water District is a partner in this project.

Edible Kent—$385.84 to install and secure a demonstration rain barrel to help water a vegetable garden near the farmer’s market.  The grant will also aid the organization in paying for their Adopt-A-Spot rental.  The organization provides education about sustainable food production and donates this organic food to the community.

Kent State University Foundation— $1,000 toward the purchase of a rechargeable battery for Z. E. B., a zero-emission golf cart vehicle which will be used on campus to transport visitors and demonstrate the feasible use of Fuel Cell technology.  The students responsible for building this vehicle are working under Dr. Yanhai Du at Kent State University’s College of Applied Engineering, Sustainability, and Technology.

Family and Community Services—$1000 to replace two paper towel dispensers at the Community Clothing Center with energy efficient air hand dryers, thus reducing paper towel usage two thirds, leading to saving trees, and reducing waste water and air pollution that result from paper towel manufacturing. The County Clothing Center provides free gently used clothing and other household items to individuals in need.

All checks will be distributed at the KEC Annual Meeting, February 27, 2017, 6:30 PM, at Unitarian Universalist Church of Kent—Fessenden Hall 228 Gougler Avenue, Kent 44240.  After a short business meeting, there will be a presentation on solar energy, free and open to the public.

Third Annual Edith Chase Symposium


Planning for this year’s Edith Chase Symposium is well underway, and this year’s program looks to be (yet again) better than the last. For the 2017 program, Edith Chase Symposium will have its own full 501(c)3 status, and to celebrate there will be not only the annual Friday evening lecture, but also readings at the Wick Poetry Center and a guided tour of the restored Plum Creek Park. You can find out more information, register for the events, and contribute to the festivities at http://www.edithchasesymposium.org/.

-Lis Regula

Green Energy Still on the Rise

Innovation and green energy that save companies money may be the best way to curb greenhouse gases—good old pragmatism. Many investors are no longer willing to bet on the long-term risks of relying on coal, oil or gas. Renewables such as wind and solar have become increasingly cost-effective energy sources.

In Time (December 12, 2014), Richard Branson of Virgin Group says “we need to aggressively deploy a lot more renewables—wind, solar, geothermal—in the power sector, in heavy industries like mining, in the built environment and transport,” as well as increase energy efficiency. Countries need to learn from each other, coordinate efforts and help developing countries get more access to renewables. China and India are doubling their commitment to clean energy. And no matter who is in the White House, America is competitive and wants to be on the winning side.

Recent examples of innovation and pragmatism include the following:
  • In 2015, for the first time, more renewable capacity was created worldwide than conventional fossil-fuel generation. And the International Energy Agency expects that renewable energy will grow by 42% globally by 2021. (Time, December 12, 2016)
  • Kohl’s envelopes advertise: “Kohl’s is LEED-ing the way with more than 40 million square feet of LEED certified space.”
  • As the world’s largest retailer, Walmart is seeking to reduce emissions in its operations by 18% by 2025 and will work toward adding zero waste to landfills in key markets such as Canada and the United States. The company also plans to be powered by 50% clean and renewable energy sources. (Akron Beacon Journal, November 15, 2016)
  • Tesla and Solarcity have developed solar roof panels that don’t stick out. The roof panels harness the sun’s power but do not look like traditional solar panels. They will be available this year, but pricing has not yet been announced. (Time, December 5, 2016)
  • Google expects that in 2017 it will have amassed sufficient renewable energy to meet all of its electricity needs throughout the world—and its energy needs are immense given all the offices and data centers that the company runs. The company, however, won’t be able to power operations solely on wind and solar because of regulations and complicated power grids. “But it may be able to offset every MW hour of electricity supplied by a power plant running on fossil fuels with renewable energy.” (Akron Beacon Journal, December 7, 2016)
  • The Breakthrough Energy Coalition has announced a $1 billion investment fund to support new energy ventures. Members of this group include Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberk, George Soros, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Alibaba’s Jack Ma, and Richard Branson. They have jumped into the alternative energy race. (Akron Beacon Journal, December 12, 2016)
Finally, Michael Bloomberg says in Time (December 28, 2016) that in climate change, as in many other areas, where Washington fails to drive progress, cities will act. Washington sees climate change as partisan, but mayors
of both small towns and big cities, see it as a reason to clean the air, save money on energy, build modern infrastructure, protect themselves from extreme weather and attract new businesses…. I am confident that no matter how the EPA is run, and no matter what laws the next Congress passes, we will meet the pledges that the U.S. made as part of the international agreement signed in Paris… cities and businesses and citizens will continue to reduce emissions… They recognize that reducing greenhouse gas emissions can make their communities healthier places to lie and work…. Over the past decade, Congress has not passed a single bill that takes direct aim at climate change. Yet at the same time, the U.S. has led the world in reducing carbon-dioxide emissions…. To find out where the country is heading, don’t follow the national headlines. Get involved locally. That’s where the action is.
—Lorraine McCarty

Fuel Cell Technology Developing at KSU

In October 2016, Dr. Yanhai Du, assistant professor and researcher in fuel cells at Kent State University’s College of Applied Engineering, Sustainability and Technology, came to our breakfast meeting to talk about fuel cells. Several people from KEC also toured his lab in December.  Dr. Du is a leading researcher in clean energy and holds several patents in the fuel cell area, including one for a compact spiral ceramic fuel cell produced by 3D printer.

Dr. Du talked about the role of the fuel cell in our energy mix. In the United States, 66.1% of our energy is produced from fossil fuels such as dr-du
coal and natural gas. Nuclear makes up 19.4%.  Renewables are less than 13.2% now, but are increasing. Even with the political situation, Dr. Du feels the use and growth of renewables is now unstoppable.

So what is a fuel cell?  Think of it as a “magic box.”

fuel-cellIt is an electrochemical process that doesn’t burn the fuel. You do have to make hydrogen which consumes energy – actually more energy than a fuel cell produces.  But if you generate the hydrogen with renewables (such as solar), you can use the power of the fuel cell without needing to depend on the sun.

Solar, wind, hydropower and nuclear power can all be used to produce the energy needed to power a fuel cell.  There are several different types of fuel cells, and the ‘magic box’ is a complex place, but a fuel cell can last 10 -20 years and is more efficient than current electricity production methods.  A fuel cell can be very small or very large, composed of a stack of fuel cells—currently up to 56 mega watts (MW), which can drive a car, train, plane, etc.

For those of you who are technically minded:  A fuel cell is an electrochemical device that directly converts (through a chemical reaction between a fuel and an oxidant) chemical energy in the fuel to electricity (with water and heat as its byproduct, without burning the fuel).

Advantages of fuel cells include:

  • Low to zero emissions
  • High efficiency
  • Reliability
  • Fuel Flexibility
  • Energy Security
  • Ruggedness
  • Durability
  • Sustainability
  • Quiet Operation
  • Technology Capability
  • Light weight
  • Long Lasting

These advantages are causing a wide variety of commercial usage, including the following:

  • The top ten fuel cell power customers are AT&T, Walmart, Ebay, Apple, Coke, Cox, CBS, Sheraton and Adobe. Their use ranges from 17.1 MW to 1.6 MW.
  • The top fuel cell forklift customers are SYSCO, Walmart, P&G, Central Grocers, BMW, WinCo Foods, Kroger, Lowes, Wagmans, and Coke. Their use ranges from over 700 forklifts to 96 forklifts each.
  • Stark Area Regional Transit Authority (SARTA) in Canton, OH has received a grant covering most of the purchase price of 5 fuel cell buses.  While they are more expensive initially, they provide twice the mileage as diesel buses and have zero carbon emissions.   Canton will be third in the country in fuel cell bus usage.  Ohio itself is one of the top five fuel cell states.
  • There are fuel-cell cars coming out now but they are very expensive at about $58,000. By 2025, the goal is 1.5 million cars with zero emissions.
  • Cargo trucks can also run on fuel cells. Fuel cell cargo trucks run 400 miles on one fill of hydrogen.  The size of a fuel cell depends on how much hydrogen you want to use.  You use a pressure gauge to tell how much is in tank.  Hydrogen is safer than gasoline—gasoline can burn a car, but if hydrogen leaked, it would just flow into the air.
  • Coradia LINT is a new CO2-emission-free regional train and alternative to diesel power. It is powered by a hydrogen fuel cell, its only emission being steam and condensed water while operating with a low level of noise. Alstom, a French company operating worldwide, is among the first railway manufacturers in the world to develop a passenger train based on such a technology.

Dr. Du talked about ways fuel cells could help the coal and other fossil fuel energy sources in the future.  If you put a fuel cell next to the fossil fuel energy source, you could use fuel cells there to make electricity,  put it right into the grid, and skip transportation/shipping altogether. If the CO2 is captured and put it into the ground, then the electricity would be carbon-free. But for this to happen, the fuel cells need to be bigger than they are now and more research is needed on capturing the carbon.

Future research into designs of fuel cells (to improve the ‘magic box’) are underway to improve their performance and to ramp up the size.  Some research is going into using ammonia instead of hydrogen as a fuel.

Kent State students are now experimenting with designing and building a solar fuel cell powered/zero emission golf cart which could be used to take guests around campus and demonstrate the technology.

We were fascinated by this presentation and excited by the help that this technology is lending to our clean energy future.  Dr. Du would like the community to learn more about fuel cells, and he encouraged anyone who would like to tour his lab to come anytime.  If he is not available, one of his students would be glad to show a visitor around.