Evironmental movement is all wrongI look upon the 25 years...

the Forum

April 25, 1995

Evironmental movement is all wrong

I look upon the 25 years since the first Earth Day as an environmental failure that costs too much and has produced very little.

Planting trees and cleaning debris from the banks of streams are housekeeping chores having little to do with the laws and regulations that negatively affect so many industries.

The reason for the high cost and poor performance of the environmental movement is simple enough. All the laws and regulations are based on theories that have never been identified.

If the theories are wrong, the solutions are wrong, and all the money in the world can't fix them.

For example, the present deregulation of electric utilities is supported by eminent economists. Alfred E. Kahn compares it with the deregulation of the trucking and railway industries.

The only way this could be true is if 50 passengers are dumped every 50 miles from a passenger train leaving Baltimore for New York with 1,000 passengers.

Does this sound ludicrous? So is the statement that cheap electricity from the West can supply high cost markets in the East 1,000 miles away. The economists choose to ignore the losses in an electrical circuit.

Auto pipe emission testing has been a controversial issue. Auto exhaust supposedly produces bad ozone as opposed to the good ozone at the ozone layer. The love affair with ozone has not only affected the auto, but particularly the cooling industry.

The only way ozone can be formed is by a photochemical process when ultra violet light breaks oxygen into its atomic state.

The process is similar to the breakdown of chlorine by blue light. It is impossible for auto exhaust to produce ozone.

The greatest amount of ozone is produced where the concentration of oxygen is the greatest. That is at sea level. As the air thins out, the concentration of oxygen diminishes, and therefore the ozone.

By how much? Just as we establish a temperature gradient to estimate the cooling of the air, we can establish the diminishing of the density.

From data, oxygen is reduced to 25 percent every 5 miles. For 10 miles the reduction from sea level is 1/16th. For 15 miles (where the ozone layer supposedly exists) the reduction is 1/64th. The theory about the ozone layer has never been proved, nor can it be proved.

The issue of the environment is not a matter of conservatism versus liberalism.

It is a matter for the welfare of this nation and its ability to compete in the world market.

We are a nation of hero worshipers, just as the British revere their royalty. We allowed Ralph Nader to gut our nuclear program. We allowed him to destroy 175 years of developing the most efficient generating stations in the world. We never believe that a hero can also have clay feet.

Just as the ancient Hebrews built the golden calf, we as a nation have built one of our own by the belief that man can destroy this planet.

Martin Sanders


Environmental profiteering

I have been a mechanical-environmental engineer for well over 30 years in private industry, the naval service and in government. I have seen the effects of short-sighted actions on the part of industry and government in severely damaging the environment on which all of us depend for our very existence.

Believe me, all the arguments in the Congress and in the Supreme Court are not about the endangered species or clean water or breathable air. Most of the arguments are about the quick buck, lots of money for specially favored industries and congressional benefactors.

These favored industries and people are not carrying their fair share of the tax load, and they want to bear even less of the burden.

Like special treatment for the lumber industry, already subsidized to the tune of $450 million a year by American taxpayers. One of these corporations is 50 percent Japanese owned.

Or agribusiness. The really big farms are corporate operations whose investors don't live down on the farm. They receive big dividends in their big city, courtesy in part to huge government subsidies for irrigation water.

When an outfit like the ultra conservative Heritage Foundation pushes for changes in environmental regulations, it's major bad news for everybody but the wealthy.

Legislators and their advisers never include the costs of not doing the right thing, such as serious medical effects, the reduction of soil fertility and farm output, the poisoning of fish and shellfish sources and so on. This damage costs the taxpayer close to $50 billion a year.

The real "takers" are the greedy who gobble up our resources and damage the environment, not the government.

In the long run, the true endangered species is mankind. Mother Nature will not endure our follies much longer.

Ernest M. Stolberg


Too much O. J.

A recent article concerned people who admit they have been totally consumed by the O.J. Simpson trial.

Watching it on television has made them repeatedly late to work, appointments and other engagements.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.