Earth Day Post

I recently had an interesting discussion with a couple of my conservative relatives about environmental issues; from global warming to recycling. And since today is Earth Day, I thought I would write a post about it.

The conversation started out being about global warming. My argument was that global warming is overwhelmingly thought of as a real phenomenon among scientists, and a majority of them also think the pollution and emissions caused by human beings are playing a role in this. We can argue about how much, but my position was that it clearly was something that the majority of scientists had a consensus on. And based on that, it might be a good idea for counties like the U.S. to put more efforts into pollution control, etc.
(for more on global warming, see:
http://www.realclimate.org/)

My relatives were skeptical of global warming claims, suggesting that it is just an alarmist theory promoted by environmentalists. They seemed to be drawing a lot on a recent book by Michael Crichton. A review of that book’s footnotes can be found here:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/02/06/checking_crichtons_footnotes/
a key sentence from the article:
"Naomi Oreskes, a science studies scholar at the University of California, San Diego, recently analyzed more than 900 scientific articles listed with the keywords ''global climate change,'' and failed to find a single study that explicitly disagreed with the consensus view that humans are contributing to global warming."

My relatives had various arguments on this, in particular taking a position that I find curious, that is, that scientists can’t always be trusted. I suppose this could be so, but it strikes me as odd that they seem to be arguing that we give more credibility to conservative pundits and best-selling fiction writers rather than the consensus view of the scientific community.

We also talked about recycling. At one point, an argument was put forward that most of what we put in our recycling bins ends up, not being recycled, but instead being dumped into landfills, just like any other trash. I think the point was that the environmental movement had sold consumers on the idea of recycling, but the reality was that it simply isn’t practical.

So I was very interested to see a multi-part series on recycling in Minnesota recently in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. I’ll briefly note some of the main points below and provide a link. What I really find remarkable is that, although the assertion about recycling was mostly wrong, there is a kernel of truth to what was said. In the area of glass recycling, a significant percentage is now being sent to landfills, for a variety of reasons.

That doesn’t mean that recycling efforts aren’t working in general, or that they aren’t worthwhile. But I suspect this is another case where a single fact, pulled out of a complex issue, has been picked up, spun, distorted, and bounced from one person to another, via the Internet and other mass media. As I said to my relatives at the time, we all seem to have different set of "facts" that we’re sure of, yet they often are in stark contradiction.

To me this underscores the value of the basic concept of journalism, an enterprise where the overriding goal is to get as close to the truth as possible, to investigate the different facts and arguments, and reach some reasonable conclusion as to what is true and what is not.

The reality, I believe, is that recycling is a worthwhile and successful endeavor, and where there are problems, they should be fixed, not taken as a reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Environmentalism has been made a target by some elements of the conservative movement, but the fact is, it is not inherently liberal or conservative. Nor does it have to be anti-business, as some would argue. The recycling series I note below talks about how this industry makes an impressive contribution to Minnesota’s economy, while at the same time making our world a better place to live.
 

From the Star Tribune series:
http://www.startribune.com/static/recycling/main.html

"If you recycle, you'll help save enough electricity to power 321,000 homes for a year. That's more households than Minneapolis and St. Paul combined.

Not worth it? You'll also help keep the equivalent of 203,000 tons of coal from burning. That means fresher air and less toxic mercury in our lakes and streams.

There's more. Start recycling and you will help to support jobs -- paying an average of $16 an hour -- for some 19,000 Minnesotans.

And if nothing else grabs you, here's one final thought: Keep recyclable materials out of the landfill, and you'll be contributing to the state's tax revenue without paying a dime. The recycling industry adds $64 million to Minnesota state tax coffers every year.

Recycling … now adds nearly $3 billion to the state's economy yearly. The material it produces has become a valuable commodity.

Local governments often share in the profits. Minneapolis, for example, received $1.5 million from the sale of its recycling last year and is on track to reap even more this year."