Tracking Down the Causes of Pollution
OH, YES, some of us have our television sets, microwave ovens, and personal computers. But where are our fresh air, clean food, and pure water? Why does a technology capable of sending a man to the moon seem incapable of providing us with these, our most basic needs? Why, in fact, are the deadly tracks of pollution becoming more pronounced?
“Everything Is Growing”
Professor Kurt Hamerak, writing in a German scientific journal, claims that “all environmental problems are essentially caused by growth, above all by the unexpectedly rapid growth in population.” World population has more than doubled just since 1950. In addition, we are living in what a United Nations’ study calls a “world of exploding cities.” By the year 2000, an estimated three fourths of the people living in developed regions will be located in urban areas. When population density increases, so also do the possibilities of pollution.
As there is a growth in the number of people who are demanding goods that increasing knowledge and technology make possible, industrial production and trade also grow. This means new factories and chemical plants—new sources of pollution. And these in turn need energy, so new power plants must be built. Worldwide, almost 400 of them are nuclear reactors.
Also growing is the amount of leisure time that people have. This gives them more time and opportunity to encroach upon the countryside, oftentimes polluting land, air, and water, as well as jeopardizing plant and animal life, in the process.
Instead of preventing pollution, modern civilization has actually helped create it by fostering a materialistic view that at best is a mixed blessing. Many responsible people are now warning that uncurbed growth is leading to ruin. G. R. Taylor in The Doomsday Book concludes: “Up to now it has seemed that the materialist view . . . must triumph. Suddenly it begins to appear that it cannot triumph.”
Yes, “everything is growing,” says Professor Hamerak, “including the problems.” But there are other more pivotal reasons why the fight against pollution is not going well.
Insufficient Knowledge
For example, “practically nothing” is known, says The Doomsday Book, “about the interactions taking place between several pollutants present at the same time.” Also uncertain is the amount of poisonous substances or of radioactivity a person can be subjected to before suffering adverse effects. Toxicologist L. Horst Grimme of the University of Bremen claims that “it is not possible to quantify the risk that arises from the production, usage, and distribution of pollutants.” He feels there is no way to determine definitely at what level a pollutant crosses the threshold between harmless and harmful. “In many instances,” he says, “experts are simply insufficiently knowledgeable to be able to determine acceptable limits.” Additionally, research is so recent that no one really knows what the long-term effects of even “acceptable limits” might be.
Also posing a question is how to dispose of toxic wastes. This is no small problem because the amount of hazardous waste generated in Western Europe alone runs into millions of tons a year. (See chart.) Six main disposal methods are used: (1) disposal at sea; (2) landfills; (3) long-term storage; (4) physical, chemical, or biological treatment; (5) incineration on land or at sea, and (6) reclamation and recycling. None of these methods is completely satisfactory or foolproof.
Human Frailties and Limitations
On a stormy March night in 1978, the supertanker Amoco Cadiz lost control of its rudder and ran aground off the Brittany coast of France. Over 200,000 tons of crude oil spilled into the sea, killing some 10,000 birds, disrupting the oyster industry, polluting over a hundred miles [160 km] of beach, and creating a gigantic oil slick. Human negligence was to blame.
A more terrifying example of human frailties took place in April 1986. A serious accident at the nuclear reactor plant in Chernobyl, U.S.S.R., killed some 30 persons, endangered untold thousands, and forced the evacuation of 135,000 Soviet citizens. The Wall Street Journal reports: “Many scientists say the long-term health effects of the radiation absorbed by Soviets and Europeans after the nuclear accident will remain unknown for years. . . . [They] expect increased cases of leukemia and lung, breast and thyroid cancers.” According to a Pravda report, the disaster was caused by “irresponsibility, gross neglect of duty, and lack of discipline.”
Similar accidents have occurred before. Der Spiegel says that “mankind has several times slithered past catastrophe by a hairbreadth.” This German magazine claims to have gained access to 48 out of over 250 reports of reactor disturbances filed with the International Atomic Energy Organization, mishaps in such separated places as Argentina, Bulgaria, and Pakistan. Many of these, including the partial meltdown in March 1979 at Three Mile Island in the United States, were traced to human error.
Not only are humans prone to error but they are also limited in their control over the elements. Since the usual wind pattern in central Europe is from west to east, the Federal Republic of Germany must put up with polluted air blown in from England, while the German Democratic Republic and Czechoslovakia bear the brunt of polluted air from the Federal Republic. But winds can be fickle. For example, during the Chernobyl disaster, they shifted, causing Poland, the Baltic countries, and Scandinavia—not to speak of the Soviet Union itself—to be more severely polluted with radioactive air than other parts of Europe.
More Serious Deficiencies
People often lack honesty and objectivity in appraising the facts about pollution. While environmental protectionists may exaggerate negative aspects in support of their argument, their opponents may play up the positive side. For example, one authority says about polluted rivers: “A goodly part of the Elbe, rated high at the turn of the century among European waterways in its profusion of fish, has long been dead biologically.” The same claim has been made about the Rhine, especially after the Sandoz tragedy. A spokesman for the chemical industry, on the other hand, claims that “even after the fire in Sandoz, the Rhine is still in better shape than it was ten years ago.”
Strictly speaking, this may be true because indications in 1983 were that governmental antipollution legislation was proving effective and that the Rhine was making a remarkable recovery. And of the Thames River in Britain, the magazine National Geographic reports: “In the past 30 years pollution has been reduced 90 percent.” This success has only been possible because of concerted effort. But according to journalist Thomas Netter, this is lacking in many countries because “ecological disaster is still seen widely as someone else’s problem.”
No doubt this is one reason why governments are having so much difficulty adopting international pollution controls. For years Canada and the United States failed to reach any agreement on fighting acid rain. Finally, modest progress was made in 1986. Until then, as a Canadian official said, “Acid rain was dead in the water, just like the fish.” And although 31 nations agreed in 1987 to halve the production of the aerosol sprays that appear to be destroying the earth’s ozone layer, this goal will not be reached until the turn of the century. To promote more international cooperation, the European Community designated 1987 as the “Year of the Environment.”
Little progress will be made, however, as long as greedy people deliberately pollute for the purpose of monetary gain, or selfish people for the sake of convenience. Success depends upon concern for the welfare of one another and a willingness to accept personal responsibility. “Pollution control starts at home—of this I am convinced,” says Germany’s environmental minister Klaus Töpfer. So every citizen must do his part. The little man may self-righteously point a finger at the big man—chemical plants and factories—but is the little man any better if his own fingers are busy littering?
The Bible foretold that in “the last days” people would be “lovers of themselves, lovers of money, . . . not open to any agreement, . . . without love of goodness.” (2 Timothy 3:1-5) Since these are the very qualities that promote pollution, the situation may look bleak. Still, we have reason to believe that the hurdles standing in the way of a pollution-free world will be cleared—and soon!
[Box on page 6]
Hurdles in Man’s Fight Against Pollution
◼ Uncontrolled growth
◼ Insufficient knowledge
◼ Human frailties
◼ Lack of control over the elements
◼ Selfish disregard for the welfare of others
[Chart/Map on page 7]
(For fully formatted text, see publication)
Estimated Tons of Toxic Wastes Produced in One Recent Year
Finland 87,000
Norway 120,000
Sweden 550,000
Netherlands 280,000
Britain 1,500,000
F. R. of Germany 4,892,000
Switzerland 100,000
France 2,000,000