Question of the Week: If you could ask the public one question about the environment, what would it be?
Posted on November 3rd, 2008 - 10:30 AMEach week we ask a question related to the environment. Please let us know your thoughts as comments. Feel free to respond to earlier comments or post new ideas. Previous questions.
Here on the blog team, we try to come up with Questions Of The Week that are relevant and engage reader interest. But we also want the questions to be balanced and avoid leading the reader to any particular conclusion. What question would you ask?
If you could ask the public one question about the environment, what would it be?
En español: Cada semana hacemos una pregunta relacionada al medio ambiente. Por favor comparta con nosotros sus pensamientos y comentarios. Siéntase en libertad de responder a comentarios anteriores o plantear nuevas ideas. Preguntas previas.
Aquí en el equipo del blog, tratamos de elaborar Preguntas de la Semana que sean relevantes y generen el interés del público. Sin embargo, también queremos que las preguntas sean equilibradas y eviten encauzar al lector a una conclusión en particular. ¿Cuál pregunta haría?
¿Si pudiera plantear al público una pregunta sobre el medio ambiente, cuál sería?
Tags: ask the public, Question of the Week
| Permalink | TrackBack
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Follow us on Twitter
Question of the Week
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Gasoline prices have sharply declined in recent weeks. Have you maintained changes in your driving behavior that you adopted during the summer spike, or have you gone back to your old ways?
[Reply]
Anonymous reply on November 3, 2008 4:04 pm:
And what will you do when the price inevitabily goes up again?
[Reply]
Davcid Oates reply on November 5, 2008 12:24 pm:
I will probably go back to my old ways of buying gas and saving money with my hybrid car because the prices only went down because they want the new president to look good but I guarentee it will be back up in the next few weeks.
[Reply]
Anonymous reply on November 10, 2008 9:25 am:
Because “they” want the new president to look good? Who exactly is “they?”
The price drop is tied into the stock market fluctuations, and the fact that people have actually decreased consumption in recent months. More likely the price will go up when OPEC cuts production, consumers get complacent about saving, and/or the economy takes a turn upward.
[Reply]
Anonymous reply on November 10, 2008 9:27 am:
FYI we don’t have a new president yet, Bush is still in office and prices started dropping several weeks BEFORE the actual election.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Will you change your way of life by making personal sacrifices in the way you use energy, consume products, dispose of waste, and make use of land and water to help protect and improve the environment?
That’s really a lot of questions in front of one question mark. But the idea is that the general public needs to look more at itself and less at government to make a difference in environmental protection and sustainability.
[Reply]
Jess B. reply on November 5, 2008 5:43 pm:
My question is along those lines because it does seem like many do expect the government to make the difference. I would add, “Or, do you expect your government to make the sacrifice for you?”
Also, would you make different choices if you were provided with more information on the alternatives or reasons why the ‘norm’ is not always the best decision for the environment?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Are you willing to entirely sacrifice your electric power that you enjoy today and live in a home without electric power to save a family of praire dogs?
[Reply]
Rod Escobedo reply on November 3, 2008 5:47 pm:
Excuse me, but I don´t understand the relationshis in this issue.
Could you be more especific, please?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 3:05 pm:
Nope.
Also, in certain areas, Prairie Dogs are quite harmful to the agriculture industry. And, as such, are classified as a nuisiance/pest and are treated as such.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
How can we balance our need for safe, clean energy with our ability to compete in a world market that does not always have the same values as the U.S.?
To only address one side of the scale and ignore the other has not worked in the past. Ignoring the environment resulted in poluted lands, and ignoring the financial forces sent our jobs to China and India.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Got any ideas about how to solve global warming? (If we ask this of enough people, we will discover the multi-faceted answers that we need to tackle this problem.)
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Does anyone have any knowledge about what ripped through the state that created so many fibers, glitter, particulate matter and gaseous chemicals to cross contaminate different properties? It either came from the sky and created a creeping surface energy effect or came up from the ground initially.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Why don’t you take recycling more seriously? It is such an easy thing to do.
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 3:07 pm:
I’m just curious if you’ve done any research on the total energy cost of recycling?
Did you know that, overall, it takes LESS energy (in total) to produce paper from virgin trees than it does to recycle used paper into a re-useable product?
Same for glass.
And plastics.
And most metals.
Aluminum recycling is just about the ONLY recyclable material that takes less energy to reuse than to mine new.
So, from a “total energy consumption” standpoint, recycling is harmful to the environment.
[Reply]
Karen reply on November 6, 2008 5:45 pm:
So we should USE less paper. Print on both sides, so we don’t have to make as much.
[Reply]
Jeff Maurer, EPA reply on November 7, 2008 3:29 pm:
Jared is right about the energy savings from aluminum recycling, but he seems to have gotten some bad information about the other materials. In reality:
- Recycling one ton of paper would save enough energy to power the average American home for six months;
- Making glass from recycled glass cullet saves energy because cullet melts at a lower temperature than most conventional materials used to make glass;
- According to the Ohio Department of natural resources, recycling one ton of plastic saves as much energy as 197 gallons of gas. The American Beverage Association calculates the energy savings from 1 ton of containers made from recycled plastics at 7200 kilowatt hours.
- Recycling of other matierals, including metals, usually results in energy reductions as well. For example, according to the Steel Recycling Institute, the US steel industry has reduced its energy intensity per ton of steel shipped by 29% since 1990, mostly due to steel recycling.
Here are some resources for you to explore:
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/paper/basics/index.htm#benefits
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/glass.htm
http://ohiodnr.com/Home/ToolsandResources/PlasticsRecycling/tabid/17876/Default.aspx
http://www.sustainable-steel.org/
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
What one thing can the government (state, local, natl) do to make it easier for you to be more protective of the environment? (Examples: Subsidized hybrid cars, better public transportation, recycling credit, free home solar panels etc.)
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Do you know how and where to submit an envronmental complaint? Do you have a list of toll free phone numbers and email to submit the complaint to a EPA Region, and primacy state.
[Reply]
David Bennett - EPA Region 10 reply on November 6, 2008 5:56 pm:
Go to:
http://www.epa.gov/epahome/violations.htm
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:03 pm
If you could ask the public one question about the environment, what would it be?
“Are you aware how government agencies are wasting your time and theirs with stupid questions instead of spending your taxpayer dollars focusing on the task assigned to them?”
[Reply]
Awalker reply on November 3, 2008 2:28 pm:
Interesting take on a simple request. Did you happen to think this may be the task assigned to them?
I feel I’m part of a team, this team of environmentally conscious individuals that get to come to one spot and discuss great topics. Have you never been on a team to brainstorm an issue and try include as many ideas to get outside the box? I am tasked to bring awareness to the community I work for, and any ideas or dear god, “stupid questions” that come are all valid in my book.
Good luck with your methods, and BTW get back to work with the task you’ve been assigned.
[Reply]
Utah Chris reply on November 3, 2008 4:30 pm:
Easy big fella !!
I believe we are all concerned about the wasteful spending we see in government programs every day. Like Benita, I feel our government is bigger than it needs to be and spends dollars without regard for the taxpayers.
So… having said that, here is my one question about the environment…:
When I was my daughter’s age, they told me we were going to experince an ice-age during my lifetime. They also told me we would run out of space for landfills during my lifetime. That we would have overpopulation of the world by 2000.
In your opinion, do scientists really know anything about the earths environment or are they just guessing and creating doomsday scenarios to continue funding their research and putting a paycheck into their pocket?
[Reply]
seagul reply on November 3, 2008 8:11 pm:
Utah Chris, you hit the nail on the head. The scientists do not know everything about the earths environment. In fact their is a very large number of scientists that believe climate change is not being caused by humans. Much of the global warming therory is based on modeling and assumptions.
[Reply]
Lance reply on November 4, 2008 12:30 pm:
Environmental Scientists use the same scientific method doctors use when attempting to diagnose a cancer patient. If you knew they were just “guessing” how would that make you feel? BTW - There are cities and communities right here in America that are running out of landfill space. They are bulk hauling their trash at great distances and cost to dispose of the refuge.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:05 pm
What would you give up in order to keep a coal-burning power plant from being constructed in your state?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
To protect/enhance the quality of air, water, and land that US society can potentially affect, is US society–collectively, the residential, commerical, industrial, nonprofit, and governmental sectors–spending/investing . . .
(a) woefully too little,
(b) slightly too little,
(c) the right amount,
(d) slightly too much, or
(e) by far too much?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
What is a healthy environment worth to you?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 2:42 pm:
Please define “healthy”.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Do you REALLY understand what’s happening to our planet?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
¿Cuál crees que es tu mayor contribución personal a los problemas de medioambiente que hoy existen en tu área local y en el mundo en general (ej. capa de ozono, efecto invernadero), considerando transporte, electricidad, desechos biológicos y químicos y desperdicios en general?
Which do you believe is your greater personal contribution to the problems of environment that today exist in your local area and in the world in general (ej. ozone layer, greenhouse effect), considering transportation, electricity, chemical and biological waste and wastes in general?
[Reply]
Lina-EPA reply on November 4, 2008 6:00 pm:
Thanks for your bilingual question! Good recommendation.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
As resources become scarcer it is inevitable that changes in lifestyle and personal behavior will happen. The recent spike in the price of gasoline caused many to dramatically alter when and where they drive their cars. The crisis response to gasoline prices added to the economic crisis in this country. One example is the effect upon the auto industry. Probably most people thought that “this too will pass”, and that situation may, but other shortages will be long-lived or permanent, such as the devastating drought in the southeast and the perennial water shortages in the desert southwest.
Is it better to change behavior as needed or should we work to make permanent behavioral and economic changes in advance of a resource crisis? If we choose the latter, how do we determine which resource conservation behavior should be adopted first, second, third…….? What do we do to make the changes stick? Finally, could such actions prevent or soften unintended consequences?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Will you stop taking on faith what business leaders, and their politicians, tell you is safe about the products they distribute- ie commercials. When will people stop believing the liars? Like a common product label ” Hydrochloric acid free- contains muriatic acid”
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Do you know what your carbon footprint is and do you think it’s smaller than your parents or grandparents?
[Reply]
Sandra donnelly reply on November 3, 2008 7:22 pm:
I was recently part of a county-wide initiative on sustainability. One of the products produced was an initial carbon inventory of county activities. This lead to thinking about my personal footprint. My carbon footprint is much larger than my parents and several time larger than that of their parents. I just an article on BBC Environment entitled “Earth ‘on course for eco-crunch’ - November 3. It says in essence that we need two more planets with the same resources as our present one to continue consuming natural capital at the present rate. Scary thought but it seems the only way for us to pass anything on to future generations is to take stock and probably take enormous steps backward to low tech whenever possible. This was what I was trying to say in my comment to the Nov 3 question and I guess I can pat myself on the back because I wrote the response before reading the article. It is a thorny issue that we can either confront head-on or wait to develp and respond to in crisis mode. I would like to avoid crisis mode since chaos often accompanies such a response.
[Reply]
Matt B. reply on November 5, 2008 12:52 pm:
This is an excellent question and I would love to see it posted and some feedback on it.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I work in the wastewater field, concerned with meeting the ever decreasing limits (not implying that it is a bad thing). Question to the public: How much money are you willing to payout to meet the ever decreasing limits?
Funding from government (federal and state) only go so far to keep maintenance on aging infrustructure and upgrading wastewater treatment facilities to meet new regulations.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Do you know that you are paying for polluters to “externalize” costs and that in the case of power generators, the costs of installing scrubbers is only 1 to 5% of the cost in human health from non-scrubbed emissions?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Can you think of just 5 things you can do to improve the environment in your community; if so, are you willing to do those on a sustained basis? If not, do you know where to look to find some ideas? (hint — check out the EPA’s home page)
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Would you be willing to work a longer work day so that you only need to drive to work 4 days a week?
That would reduce your commuting time and gas related expenses by 20%. In addition, offices/facilities could turn down their thermostats and lighting for three straight days during the week. There would be a great energy savings by adopting such a strategy. In addition, people would have more family time and productive weekends which would likely lead to happier families and less stress.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm
How will the new President impact EPA?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 2:45 pm:
Easy enough to figure out… He’ll grow the size, scope, and budget; but probably not effectivness.
He is, afterall, a Socialist.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:25 pm
What did you do to protect human health and the environment today?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:27 pm
What have you done today to show your care for the environment?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Have you ever looked into the true cost of the food you eat? (e.g. How is it created? How much processing is required? Where is it delivered from?) All of these increase your carbon footprint.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
SImply stated, what are you doing to save water?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
What % reduction in greenhouse gas emissions do you think the US should commit to, over what period - and what % price increase for fossil fuels and petroleum-derived products are you prepared to pay to achieve this?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Hello from South Africa. Thank you for this blog! My Question is: Can America please give us some use full tips on what South Africa can do to lead the rest of Africa in becoming more green. We are developing fast but air pollution is a problem in parts of our country. Should we be thinking of fuel alternatives? Yes many of our people are underdeveloped, but we have some of the greatest thinkers here.
[Reply]
john reply on November 3, 2008 4:00 pm:
If you are thinking alternative fuels, biodeisel is the way to go. Ethanol is worthless: less mpgs, more expensive and more petrol based fuel is used in producing ethanol than a car that runs on petrol fuel. Go figure.
Biodeisel can also be made from waste like cooking oil from restraunts or even switch grass or other types of weeds that are virtually worthless otherwise. Even garbage from a landfill can become biodeisel.
Two things there are plenty of: water and wind. Hydrogen fuel cells and wind energy are the future.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
How prevalent are fishkills? Would appreciate knowing where, what seaon and causes. Thank you!
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
This one is a two-parter:
Why are you still driving your Hummer at 90 mph and getting 5 mpg?
Why are you still driving a Hummer [period]?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 2:46 pm:
Because, for now, America is still a free country.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Why do we all not demand more of government to step in and help to facilitate environmental changes for the better? For example, why is it status quo to have giant cars still? Why is there not public transport (trains, etc. like in Germany), recycling EVERYWHERE as a way of life, more investment into solar energy so that it would become cheaper for people to install, etc????
I am personally disgusted at how we all know about global warming, limited resources, etc. but then the government appears to turn a blind eye? I wonder if that is current administration or what? I would LOVE to see it operation by a human being with a conscience and respect for citizenry AND environments for everyone.
[Reply]
Anonymous reply on November 14, 2008 1:55 am:
michele This concern for finding someone in the government to be concerned about the community has already occurred. We are the government and we hire and fire these people with our votes. However the people who call and actually visit personally with those elected are the ones that are responded to. Your personal representative is your employee. Get busy.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Are the voices touting “virtual water” as the next big area of concern correct that a global water footprint is as perilous as the carbon footprint?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
If I were going to ask 1 public question about the environment it would be:
Since we are all in the same boat in the long run, why is it so difficult to see participation from government, industry and the private sector in maintaining the health of our environment?
[Reply]
Awalker reply on November 6, 2008 2:56 pm:
The instant payback is not there. Until they can make a ton of money off of it, it’s going to have to be reactionary event (ex. mass public sickness, media outcry, a leader to push it along)
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
What would it actually cost American citizens in order to completely stop America’s contribution to global warming, and what would this entail?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:38 pm
My question would actually be tailored around gaining an idea of how the public views the environment. In ethics class you learn many different points of view about environmental ethics. Basically, there are religious views, inner values, and relational views. Soe believe that they are here to care for the animals and wildlife, some see that care for in a dominating type sense where the only way to care for the animals is to dominate them so that they accept the care, some see it in more of a sense of low profile caring, kind of directing with minimal contact and minimal interruption. Others find themselves more at a level of where they have a duty to the environment, some see that duty as a way of keeping the earth in equilibrium some see it as an expression of the fact that humans have evolved far enough that they owe back to the environment some sense of protection or resource, or favor, etc. Some see that they owe a duty to mankind by caring for the environment and making it more sustainable to mankind, or by caring for the environment and making it more peaceful to mankind. Basically, I’d want to know:
“What motivates one to care for or disregard the environment?”
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
If water resources are to be reserved solely for municipal and/or recreational uses, not agricultural production, do you plan on eating trees, flowers and bluegrass?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Have you ever whatched someone die from Cancer?
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 7:08 pm
If Big Oil was setting the price in the market when crude was $145 per barrel, why aren’t they doing it now when the price is less than $65 per barrel?
Of course the answer is that it’s a global economy and a free market system. The oil companies aren’t the bad guys. They are our friends.
[Reply]
November 3rd, 2008 at 9:49 pm
what drives you (would it take) to change your behavior towards reducing your ecological footprint?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 1:18 am
Would you say that the environment that you live in is a clean and safe environment?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 3:14 am
1- Do for the future generation environment we have?
2- Our task is to preserve the environment?
3- How to preserve the environment of you?
4- Do you have an income of the environment for you?
5- For breaching laws environment fined how much you paid for?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 5:33 am
“What are 10 things that you, personally, can do to reduce or eliminate your use of plastic?”
Plastic is not bio-degradable; it lasts for thousands of years. Much of it ends up in our oceans and, of course, in the fish we eat.
Plastic breaks into smaller and smaller pieces until it blends with the food sources of nearly all marine life. Plastic leaches toxic chemicals. If we don’t act soon, we’ll all be eating lots more of those.
Right now there is a “landfill” much bigger than the state of Texas, floating in the north Pacific (the north Pacific gyre). It is composed mainly of plastics, and it is growing by leaps and bounds.
The time to act is now.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch.htm
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 8:31 am
How many people know what the Form R Report is and does it really provide value if a large majority of citizens have no idea what it is and how to find it and that much of the data reported is already publicly available?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Do you think it would be a better idea for the US government to give each person (population estimated at 317 million) 1 million dollars to stimulate the economy by purchasing more efficiant cars, solar panels, energy saving appliances, etc., instead of giving corporate buy-outs? It would be cheaper for the federal government in the long run.
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 10:36 am
So many great questions have been asked so far. Thanks to everyone for the thoughtfulness behind them. Here is my question:
How would you describe your relationship to the environment?
a) I am apart from and superior to the rest of the species that inhabit this planet.
b) I am charged with taking care of the planet for all species.
c) I am an integral part of nature’s web and responsible for behaving in ways that honor the right of all species to exist.
d) other?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 2:53 pm:
A and B, and part of C.
As a Christian, I believe that I am indeed apart from and superior (intellectually, morally, etc) from all other life forms. Also as a Christian, I know that I’ve been called to be responsible with what’s been given me.
However, the responsibility to “take care of the environment” takes a back seat to the responsibility to “take care of fellow man”.
I believe that it’s entirely responsible to use 200 acres (out of 400,000) to drill for oil that millions of people would use; even at the expense of a few caribou and polar bears.
I do not believe that ANY species has a “right” to exist, theologically speaking…
[Reply]
Christine Smith reply on November 12, 2008 12:10 pm:
As a Christian, I completely disagree with you Jared. Every species, indeed every individual, has intrinsic value precisely because they are created by God. Indeed, in Geneis, God gives the vegetation as food not ONLY to us, but ALSO to the animals, implying that they too have a RIGHT to life in creation. It was only by God’s grace and gift that He bestowed on us the role of steward, which necessitated our having a greater intelligence, morality, etc.. This role is intended to be exercised with the grace and compassion that Christ exhibits towards us–Christ is the Good Shepherd, we are His “sheep”–the good shepherd gave his life for his sheep. In the same manner, we, as “shepherds” of creation (creation including all life on earth, including mankind), must be willing to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of creation, of our “sheep”. It is true that we are of “more value than they” (the animals), but then, inherently, that makes them the “least of these”, does it not?
In Christ,
Christine
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Why is it people don’t use public transport for travelling to office? Especially in developed countries people tend to use their own transport than Public transport. Even the educated lot don’t want to use public transport and save Earth?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Would you be willing to publicly boycott Exxon Mobile until they agree to spend some of thier HISTORIC PROFIT they made off of us last quarter on renewable and alternative energy resources?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 3:00 pm:
If you study the oil industry, you’ll see that their PROFIT MARGINS aren’t out of line with most major industry. And, in fact, are often times much lower. Do you know that Coca Cola, just on the sale of Coke, has TWICE the profit margin that “Big Oil” does?
What about the Silver and Copper industries? Both of these have a higher profit margin than does Big Oil. So does the Iron and Steel industry. Tobacco is also much higher than Oil.
Why do you not want other companies to do the same with their profits?
Also, if you do enough research, you’ll find that oil companies pour huge amounts of money into alternative fuels research and development, as well as into renewable energy source avenues.
If you’re going to demonize “big oil” for their profits, even though their margins are lower than most big industries, then you should at least be intellectually honest enough to slam all industry that has higher margins.
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Will You act to add the Rights of Nature to the United States Constitution? Will you afford Nature the Right to be free from abuse? The Right to live? The right to thrive in natural harmony?
[Reply]
Jared reply on November 6, 2008 3:02 pm:
Nature is not capable of entering into any kind of moral contract.
“Nature” is not alive. Therefore, it can’t have any rights.
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Regarding the federal government’s “wasteful” spending, it all depends on what programs you’re looking at. If you consider EPA’s spending in recent times, the money being used in areas such as clean water, Superfund, and enforcement has been wholly inadequate to the environmental needs.
I’m not sure people living next to Superfund sites that have been spewing contamination for 10 or 20 years think the fed is overspending on cleanups. And federal money for clean drinking water and wastewater treatment has been stagnant at best just as so much of the nation’s water infrastructure is in serious decline and desperately in need of upgrades.
If you took just a tiny fraction of the mega billions being pumped into our adventure in Iraq and put it into environmental programs, the impact for the better would be immense.
So maybe a good question would be: Are you aware of how much funding the fed puts into environmental problems that affect you the most?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Regarding the federal government’s “wasteful” spending, it all depends on what programs you’re looking at. If you consider EPA’s spending in recent times, the money being used in areas such as clean water, Superfund, and enforcement has been wholly inadequate to the environmental needs.
I’m not sure people living next to Superfund sites that have been spewing contamination for 10 or 20 years think the fed is overspending on cleanups. And federal money for clean drinking water and wastewater treatment has been stagnant at best just as so much of the nation’s water infrastructure is in serious decline and desperately in need of upgrades.
If you took just a tiny fraction of the mega billions being pumped into our adventure in Iraq and put it into environmental programs, the impact for the better would be immense.
So maybe a good question would be: Are you aware of how much funding the fed puts into environmental problems that affect you the most?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Do you comprehend the complete lifecyle costs of making consumer goods, e.g., your “stuff”?
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
A question for the site administrator:
Why are questions that are posted removed when they present an opposing view to the eb and flow seen within the blog? Such opposition, when presented in a professional manner, might well produce more meaningful discussion than a string of atta-boy, back slaps when reading the string or postings.
[Reply]
Jeffrey Levy, Greenversations Editor reply on November 5, 2008 4:03 pm:
Hi. I’m not sure what you’re referring to. I agree that different viewpoints strengthen the discussion via our blog.
Therefore, we post every comment that meets our comment policy. We do work normal business hours, though, so anything coming in late or over the weekend waits until the next business day.
Now, we did hit a snag recently where some comments we intended to approve were accidentally deleted. We just restored them a few minutes ago. Was yours one of those?
[Reply]
Anonymous reply on November 5, 2008 4:57 pm:
Yes it was. Received quite a professional response via direct e-mail with a more that adequate explanation. Comment has been restored. Such a response was most appreciated. Thanks!
[Reply]
November 4th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
When mixing “silver fillings” dental personel must put leftover filling material in a special container. It is forbidden to put into the trash. Dentist in many states have to put special filters on their sinks to catch “silver fillings” from going into the sewer system. This is because “silver fillings” are made up of 50% mercury. We know that is bad for the enviornment. If silver fillings are too toxic to put into the garbage, and the sewer, why isn’t too toxic for our mouths????
[Reply]
Ellie McCann, EPA Mercury Coordinator reply on November 6, 2008 12:35 pm:
Whether mercury is harmful to people or the environment in a specific situation depends on the amount of mercury involved, the chemical form of the mercury, and other factors. The elemental mercury used in amalgam fillings has raised some safety concerns over the years because the amalgam can release small amounts of mercury vapor over time, and patients can absorb these vapors by inhaling or ingesting them. However there is little scientific evidence that the health of the vast majority of people with dental amalgam is compromised, nor that removing amalgam fillings has a beneficial effect on health. Only in rare cases of allergic reaction has any link been found between dental mercury and health problems. For that reason the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advises, as a precaution, that pregnant women and persons who have a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure should discuss dental treatment options with their health care practitioner. Dental amalgam use is regulated by FDA.
Leftover dental filling material can cause environmental problems because the relatively large amount of dental wastes from thousands of patients over time can significantly pollute the waste water entering the sewer from a dental office. The mercury in the water can then be converted to a chemical form called methylmercury, which is absorbed by local fish and the fish are then eaten by people and wildlife. The most common way that people in the U.S. are exposed to mercury is by eating fish and shellfish that contain methylmercury. More information on mercury health effects and dental amalgam can be found at http://www.epa.gov/mercury/consumerinfo.htm#dental.
[Reply]
November 5th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
How much does the cost of going “Green” affect your decision to go green?
[Reply]
November 5th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I have been in the energy business for 35 years including Coal Gasification. Are the bottoms of railroad cars leakproof and if a train is going 35mph into a headwind of 35mph will coal blow out of the railroad cars. Since most coal is transported by trains and most train tracks are in close proximity of watersheds if the answer to any one of the first questions is yes. Can Raw Coal that contains lead, arsenic and mercury leach into our water via this close proximity?
[Reply]
November 6th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
When people litter, where do you think that trash goes? Or maybe: What are you doing to improve water quality.
[Reply]
November 7th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Did you know you are most likely drinking pharmaceutical drugs and household cleaners when you fill up your glass of water from your faucet at home or at work and when you drink water bottled with filtered municipal water supply? See: http://www.epa.gov/ppcp/
[Reply]
November 8th, 2008 at 3:06 am
Do you think that you are doing enough to protect the environment?
[Reply]
November 10th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Why is EPA more interested in providing politicians overly simpile solutions (e.g. we forced X into spending $Y to solve problem) thater than actually trying to help find solutions to those problems?
[Reply]
November 12th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
My response: “What is plastic made from?”
Alternatively: “How is electricity generated?”
Both questions target the same thing conceptually–the appalling lack of environmental awareness of John Doe public. A story to illustrate this:
I could be considered one of the “smart” or “educated” members of the public I suppose. I’ve been interested in environmental issues since I was a teenager, and I’ve always been a straight-A student. When I went to college, I majored in geology, and did quite well at it. So imagine my own surprise (and embarrassment!) when I was sitting in two environmental-elective courses (the semester before I graduated, mind you!), and “discovered” for the FIRST TIME that 1) plastic is made from oil, and that 2) electricity is often generated by burning coal or other sorts of fuels that pollute the environment in a multitude of ways. I had no idea!! And by becoming aware of these facts, it dawned on me just how important it was to conserve and recycle, not just becuase there was some nebulous “happy earth” feeling attached to it or because somehow it “saved trees”, but because there concrete environmental, economic, and natural security impacts associated with doing so. It gave me a whole new appreciation of conservation, just by learning more about where our finished products really come from.
Based on my experience since then (I’ve posed the questions every so often to a random retail cashier or friend/family member), I think that this general ignorance is pervasive in our society. We have become so accustomed to going to the store and getting a nice, neat product in a box, or flipping a switch, etc.; we have become so disconnected from the manufacturing and industrial processes which bring those things to us, that in general WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW OUR CONSUMPTION PATTERNS ACTUALLY IMPACT THE WORLD. I think the environmental movement would gain a lot more traction in the consumer’s mind, if they learned more about where they’re products came from, and the impacts that those products have during the course of the entire life cycle.
Hope this helps :)
[Reply]
Markian reply on November 12, 2008 1:13 pm:
Christine, totally agree… I have educated, techie friends who were surprised to realize that plastic comes from OIL. I was surprised that they were surprised. I don’t know WHERE they thought plastic came from. But they were surprised to realize how much oil (as plastic) we simply throw away into garbage piles. Like there’s a cheap endless supply of oil…
[Reply]
November 14th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
If we know smoking will eventually kill us, why do people still smoke? If we know that the decisions we make today will lead to harm of our children, how do we carry on in good conscience?
I am willing to support change that may limit my choices of excess/conspicuous consumption today in order to save a family of prairie dogs. If I can’t save a family of lousy prairie dogs, what hope is there for a future for people I actually care about. The question - what good are prairie dogs? is best answered with the question - what good are you?
[Reply]
December 21st, 2008 at 12:54 am
In our kitchen we have a list of stores on each major ’side’ of town, and when someone is going there we check to see what we need from that area. So we will commonly combine 3-5 trips into one.
In addition, I usually write out what I’m off to get, and then map out mentally a route to cover everything in a minimal loop.
We have done this for a long time; it saves our time as well as gasoline. The only “change” in lifestyle needed is to plan one’s trips, instead of reacting to impulses.
[Reply]