Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Friday, April 11, 2014 8:43 pm

Duke Power, trees, and simple questions

We here in the ‘boro have a chronic problem: We live in the ice belt — Virginia reliably gets snow in the winter, South Carolina reliably gets rain, but we’re as likely to get freezing rain and sleet as anything else. And with ice comes falling tree limbs and entire trees. And with those come downed power lines. In our most recent ice storm, a lot of people were dark for close to a week.

Duke Energy wanted to minimize this problem by trimming back trees that are near power lines. Residents (including me, in my ignorance) protested.

Now Duke proposes to reduce the problem by injecting a chemical called Cambistat into the ground near trees adjacent to power lines. The good news is, Cambistat will make blossoming trees blossom even more aggressively while slowing the rate of limb growth. This, in turn, will reduce the frequency with which trees near power lines have to be trimmed back.

(I and others have argued that, over time, burying power lines would save Duke Energy, and therefore ratepayers, money by reducing costs associated with repairing downed lines, utility poles, transformers, etc. I still believe that to be true, but not only would the trenching required to bury lines kill a lot of trees all by itself by damaging their roots, it’s also beside the point of this discussion.)

The bad news about Cambistat? Its active ingredient, paclobutrazole, is a chemical about which almost nothing is known but which might be toxic. Relatedly, not a few local residents grow ornamentals, and even herbs, fruit or vegetables, near trees that would be so treated. And pines and cedars, the trees most vulnerable to ice breakage, wouldn’t even be treated.

But remember: We simply don’t know what the effects of exposure to the chemical would be, whether pure or in the diluted form of an herbicide, whether short-term or long-term. On the other hand, with chemical toxicity, unlike in criminal trials, lack of evidence does not automatically equate to a not-guilty verdict.

So friend and local blogger Billy Jones asked a simple question of a tree service that had responded to a Facebook post of his:  “How will Cambistat affect my nearby herb and vegetable gardens?”

From a pure PR standpoint, the response he got made the mendacity of the tobacco companies back in the day look urbane and collegial. That made Billy both angry and even more curious. Me, too, and I don’t even grow stuff.



  1. Thank you, Sir! I’ve noticed a trend of late when searching for what might be potentially dangerous or faulty products online in that one finds literally hundreds, sometimes thousands of search results praising the suspected product but nothing online that warns of possible consequences– even if used improperly, Such was the case when I began searching for info on Cambistat. I know there are services advertised on radio that claim to be able to clean up one’s reputation online and I also noted how in the News & Record articles, companies with no ties to Greensboro, Duke Energy or North Carolina were suddenly chiming in to praise the virtues of Cambistat.

    This lead me to believe these companies are subscribing to updates in Google News or some similar service using Cambistat as a keyword then rushing to its defense every time it pops up.

    Finally, you and I know a blogger who shall remain nameless who published true facts about Monsanto just a few years ago and ended up facing the threat of law suits and being literally scared for fear of life, liberty and even employment. Well, you know me, my position is unique for a writer… It took them less than 8 hours to find me and less than 24 hours to start making accusations they couldn’t back up.

    And as of 10:50 Friday night they’ve yet to provide satisfactory answers to something I think they should have seen coming years ago. After all, isn’t health and human safety our #1 concern?

    Comment by Billy Jones — Friday, April 11, 2014 10:56 pm @ 10:56 pm

  2. Yours and mine, yeah. Other “people”? Not so much, I think.

    Comment by Lex — Saturday, April 12, 2014 8:45 am @ 8:45 am

    • Apparently so. For the rest of the world it appears to be only a race to the bottom.

      Comment by Billy Jones — Saturday, April 12, 2014 4:33 pm @ 4:33 pm

  3. Lex, it was worth reading all of the posts on Billy’s blog, if ONLY to reach the following new word: absorbanant. I’m pretty sure the writer intended to write “exorbitant,” but this version is just too wonderful to ignore. Ain’t English grand?

    Comment by lgbrandon — Saturday, April 12, 2014 6:56 pm @ 6:56 pm

    • lgbrandon, I actually looked up absorbanant because I didn’t know it either. And honestly, I consider myself a hack.

      Comment by Billy Jones — Saturday, April 12, 2014 7:08 pm @ 7:08 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: