|
a |
|
Preeti on the Web |
|
Providing Food for Thought |
|
President on Wrong Environmental Path |
|
So far, by furthering the interests of profit-hungry businesses at the expense of the people’s welfare, Bush has demonstrated a completely misguided set of values. He has subordinated the priorities of people’s health, nurturance of the environment and social responsibility to profit interests. |
|
For Bush, the planet’s health is secondary to business |
|
April 2001 |
|
Note: An edited version of this opinion column appeared in the Lexington Herald-Leader newspaper in April 2001. As Earth Day approaches us this Sunday, April 22, a reflection upon our new president’s attitude towards environmental protection blatantly reveals that, to him, the safety of the people and the health of the planet remain secondary to the profit interests of businesses and industries. In an obvious sidelining of public health, Bush recently indicated that he intended to roll back a new regulation put in place by the Clinton administration that reduces the amount of arsenic that can be contained in drinking water. This rejection of the new arsenic standard completely disregards a 1999 National Academy of Sciences report stating that the old standard, instituted sixty years ago, is not stringent enough to protect public health. In addition, the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management announced last month that it was seeking to rescind regulations that require certain types of miners on federal lands to post reclamation bonds guaranteeing they will clean up after themselves. Moreover, the Bush administration has tried to remove a ban, instituted three days before Clinton left office, that protects 58 million acres of federal land from logging and new roads. In what would be tragic if it were to occur, the administration has considered issuing permits for oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a pristine and irreplaceable treasure. Most potentially destructive of all is Bush’s attitude towards global warming. We now have irrefutable evidence that global warming is occurring and that humans are playing a role in causing it. A painstakingly researched report issued last month by the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that global warming is indeed occurring and humans are at least partially responsible. Just last week, two papers in the journal Science concluded that the green house gases produced by humans have almost certainly caused the buildup of heat in the seas over the past fifty years. The potential threats of this global climate change could be catastrophic. Rising sea levels would flood densely populated shorelines. Dry spells would devastate agriculture. Higher temperatures would increase the range of disease-carrying organisms, such as mosquitoes, raising the incidence of diseases such as malaria and encephalitis. Yet, Bush has backed away from the 1997 Kyoto protocol to limit production of greenhouse gases worldwide and has jettisoned his campaign pledge to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. He explains, “…the idea of placing caps on carbon dioxide does not make economic sense.” It does make sense for our long term health and future, however. Yes, profits and the economy are important, but at what price? Endangering public health and the balance of the ecosystem are simply not worth it. Furthermore, reducing the emission of greenhouse gases does not necessarily entail slowing economic growth or raising energy prices greatly. The growth of cleaner technologies is an economic opportunity. The report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggests using an array of new technologies including alternative electric generation methods that emit little or no greenhouse gases, as well as hybrid gas-electric cars. (Toyota and Honda have already introduced such cars.) Conserving energy in the first place will reduce electricity and gas bills. There are a number of simple lifestyle changes, from using energy-saving light bulbs and windows to purchasing fuel-efficient cars in place of gas guzzling SUV’s, that would lower people’s demands for energy and consequently their energy bills. Replacing old, wasteful power plants with modern efficient ones lowers pollution and produces energy more efficiently. With more efficient energy production, we have our energy needs met. With conservation, we have curtailed our over-consumption and reduced our demand for energy. The result is less pollution, satisfaction of our energy needs and lower energy bills. The president needs to develop a plan to reduce our country’s emission of greenhouse gases immediately. So far, by furthering the interests of profit-hungry businesses at the expense of the people’s welfare, Bush has demonstrated a completely misguided set of values. He has subordinated the priorities of people’s health, nurturance of the environment and social responsibility to profit interests. As four percent of the world’s population and producers of 25 percent of its greenhouses gases, we have a responsibility not only to ourselves, but also to the world, to reduce our emissions and create a healthier and cleaner environment. This coming Earth Day, the remaining challenge is to convince our leadership to adopt this priority as well. |