Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Statists Love EPA

"Thought Leaders" (!?!?) have determined that EPA is really, really, great.

Why?

The following are highlights of EPA’s 40 year history identified in the report:

Removing Lead from Gasoline—and from the Air
Removing the Acid from Rain
Clearing Secondhand Smoke
Vehicle Efficiency and Emissions Control
Controlling Toxic Substances
Banning Widespread Use of DDT
Rethinking Waste as Materials
A Clean Environment for All/Environmental Justice
Cleaner Water
The “Community Right to Know” Act

The second and third items are questionable--the second having been a myth in the first place, the third, not-so-much-cleaner.

"Efficiency" has been obtained largely by reducing vehicle weight. Note, e.g., that semi-trailer trucks average 6.5 MPG. Along with reduced weight comes reduced safety, but....

Banning DDT is an unmitigated disaster for the Third World, but who cares about 'little brown people,' anyway? And by the way, why do you think bedbugs are coming back strong??

"Environmental Justice"????? Puhhhhhleeeeze. Nothing like a term whose definition is malleable as soft cheese. And it works so WELL in PRChina!!

"Waste not, want not" was not invented by EPA.

"Cleaner water" if you don't live downstream from MMSD, of course. Those restrictions only apply to farmers and industry.

HT: PolCap

4 comments:

Deekaman said...

1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 I would consider "accomplishments" (having been in "the biz"). The remainder is statist crap (why I am no longer in "the biz").

Anonymous said...

Banning DDT is an unmitigated disaster for the Third World, but who cares about 'little brown people,' anyway?


Not quite. The science for both sides of the equation have their plusses and minuses. Typical of you to outright dismiss legitimate environmental concerns surrounding DDT, especially those studies which have been replicated.

Anonymous said...

OK, Anon...what study result would be enough, in your mind, to balance the 20+ million deaths?

David

Anonymous said...

You're kidding, right? Solely putting the blame for those fatalities because DDT was NOT used, and refusing to take into account a myriad of other factors? WOW!

Perhaps one can take comfort that other measures have demonstrated success.

A WHO study in 2008 discovered that mass distribution of insecticide-treated mosquito nets and artemisinin–based drugs reduced malaria deaths by 50% in Rwanda and Ethiopia. Indoor residual spraying using DDT played little role in the mortality decline.

Vietnam switched from DDT to an approach using bednets, pyrethroid group insecticides, and the promotion of immediate treatment for cases. HUGE reduction in malaria cases.

Mexico has waged an effective war against malaria using a comprehensive program using NO DDT.

I'm sure you would counter with successful DDT programs. I get it. But the point is there are other alternatives which have proven to work in different environments.