Re: Ada and the NMD

[James Rogers <jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net>]

Ted Dennison wrote:
> 
> In article <3B9795E1.54B12E70@worldnet.att.net>, James Rogers says...
> >
> >Preben Randhol wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Anyhow the current goverment of USA does not seem to care at all about
> >> the environment.
> >>
> >The current US government cares deeply about the environment. It
> >simply does not agree with certain international political "solutions".
> 
> OK. Preben's statement seemed a bit extreme, but this one is a real howler.

A howler? Let's look at a few facts.

The US annually spends billions of dollars on so called super fund clean
up sites.

Emissions from US automobiles (on a per vehicle basis) are at an 
all time low.

Emissions from US factories (on a per factory basis) are at an all
time low.

Air pollution over major US cities is lower now than at any time in the
past 40 years. Compare this with polution over major cities in many
other countries. For example try Mexico City, Beijing, and Moscow.

US pollution requirements are in the process of being tightened. The
only question is how much this year.

Does this mean that the US has no additional or remaining responsibility
in the area of pollution control. Of course not. It does demonstrate a
real effort and commitment to improving the US pollution problems.

> The presidential public position seems to be something along the lines of, "the
> environment is important, as long as it doesn't undully burden business". So at
> best, its not a top priority. But again, the *real* policy (at least outside our
> shores) is whatever the individual members of our congress in the aggregate
> decide it is.
> 

Again, there is a balance to be maintained. It is theoretically possible
to simply outlaw all pollution producing sources. This approach is both
politically and economically impossible. On the other hand, doing
nothing
is just as politically and economically impossible.

Politicians in the US, as in Europe, must balance a number of
interests. How much pollution did European cities create in the
19th century? Would it have been practical to simply dismantle the
industrial revolution because of uncontrolled pollution? Of course
not. It was, however, both practical and desirable to develop more
efficient factories with improved and improving levels of pollution
control.

Jim Rogers
Colorado Springs, Colorado USA