Environmental Issues - Assignment Example

Environmental Issues Order No. 829211 ISSUE 16 - DDT a) DDT or Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane was first introduced by Paul Mueller of Switzerland,in the year 1939. In 1948 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine, for his discovery of the insecticidal properties in DDT. DDT was used to control diseases like typhus, malaria and many other insect-borne diseases among both civilians and the military and in farms, gardens, homes etc. b) The controversy surrounding DDT was whether or not it should be banned. Anne Platt McGinn, a senior researcher at Worldwatch Institute, says ‘Yes’ to the ban, as there are ‘more effective and less environmentally harmful methods’ (Easton, 2011) Taking the opposite side with a ‘No’ to the ban is Donald R. Roberts who believes that the hazards of DDT are misrepresented by the activists while in fact it proves to have saved the lives of many. Three Main areas of Disagreement between Anne Platt McGinn and Donald R. Roberts are as follows - McGinn states that the toxic DDT should only be used in an emergency to treat diseases while more environmentally friendly methods such as bed-nets, anti-malarial drugs, improving living conditions and eradication of insect breeding sites should be used. Roberts claims that the steps to eradicate Malaria by proper drains and larviciding only happen in principal cities, while the mainly affected rural areas remain vulnerable. McGinn claims that insects became resistant to DDT when ingested while Roberts claims that DDT acts only as a repellant. McGinn says ‘In order to control a disease, why should we poison our soils, our waters and ourselves?’ (Pg.289) Donald reacts by stating Science Magazine that species did not go extinct and DDT levels had declined after its use was stopped. DDT only reaches a concentration in water of 1.2 parts per billion, so the claim that it causes the death of algae is false. Birds and sea lions have not declined due to DDT as claimed, while in reality statistics have proven their increase during the use of DDT. c) After a lot of research done on the subject, I comply with the Donald’s ideology and therefore prefer the use of DDT to save humans because all other claims against DDT have no solid proof of its dangers. ISSUE 17 – Environmental Hormone Mimics a) Environmental Hormone Mimics are ‘Xenobiotic’ chemicals that have been found to mimic or disrupt the reproductive hormones such as estrogen. These chemicals are known to alter the reproduction of wildlife along with creating severe health problems like cancer in humans. The controversy is whether these claims are true or are magnified falsifications. b) According to Professor of Biological Sciences, Michele Trankina, ‘hormone mimics’ disrupt ‘everything from fish gender to human fertility’ (World & I Journal, 2001) (Easton, 2011, Pg.319) while Michael Gough, a biologist argues that these claims are only supported by “junk science”. (Endocrine Disrupters,Politics,Pesticides, the Cost of Food and Health, " , 1997) Michele Trankina states that there has been a radical decrease in ‘sperm count’, an increase in testicular cancer and defective genetalia in men due to this. Gough states that these claims ‘fell apart’ when scientists found large geographical variations in sperm counts that did not change over time. Trankina points out to the increase in breast cancer in women as a result of exposure to the hormone mimics, while Michael Gough dismisses these claims by stating that there was no proven evidence to any of these claims even though many researches had been carried out. Puberty in girls has decreased from the age 12 and 13 to 7 years of age due to exposure to xenoestrogens in water, food, creams and plastics according to Trankina. But Gough states that results of the Tulane paper researched by Dr. McLachlan himself on the toxicity levels of pesticides came back as negative. c) Due to lack of evidence and proof on the role of hormone mimics in the environment, I support Gough’s views. ISSUE 18 – SUPERFUND a) The increase in use of chemicals after World War II resulted in the need to dispose large amounts of organic and inorganic toxic chemicals. Due to inappropriate, environmentally un-friendly disposal methods, chemicals can enter the groundwater causing hazardous results. Thus ‘Superfund’ was created to clear waste sites with proper disposal techniques. ‘Taking sides’ has chosen environmentalist Robert H. Harris’s article because they support the ‘Superfund’ program and state that though there is room for improvement, great progress has been made in treatment technologies and risk assessment. Opposing the program is journalist Randall Patterson, who argues that the ‘Superfund’ program has not been used in appropriate situations because people do not accept its application. Roberts H. Harris in his article ‘Superfund Matures Gracefully’ states three key factors in proving the success of the Superfund. 1. There were many problem sites before Superfund’s passage, but a few years later, all of them were identified. 2. This program brought a revolution in the way waste was managed, by reducing types of waste management practices, which lead to the creation of Superfund sites. 3. Superfund is no longer the only way for cleanup sites as alternative methods such voluntary cleanups have evolved at Federal and State levels. Randall Patterson in his article ‘Not in their backyard’ states that Superfund cannot be successful until the public backs its actions. 1. EPA discovered ‘asbestos’ in El Dorado Hills that housed many families and gated communities. 2. High levels of amphibole fibers were found in the home of a resident there named Trent who tried to warn people of the danger the community was in. 3. Not wanting to alarm the residents, the government had told everyone to be calm, which in return made them unafraid, which led to them believing that nothing was really wrong. He concludes, that though Superfund is supposed to be making revolutionary changes to toxic disposal, they are not a serious force to reckon with, within the communities like El Dorado that trusted they were safe. After seeing the statistics and success ratio, I support the ‘Superfund’ program because it is slowly but surely proving its cause and in due course will show revolutionary progress. ISSUE 19 a) Are hormone mimics affecting our health? (http://www.wri.org/publication/content/8345) High exposures to substances like DDT and PCB’s can cause harmful effects on wildlife, but the lack of evidence on its effects on humans has been a cause for debate. ‘Our Stolen Future’ published in March 1996 is a book on the debate on ‘hormone mimics’ b) Zoologist Theo Colbern of WWF in this book states that industrial chemicals dubbed “endocrine disruptors” are wreaking havoc in the human hormonal system. This can cause reproductive, neurological and immunological abnormalities. Stephan Safe of Texas A&M University believes these claims to be over rated, as they are not relevant when it comes to humans. Even though a good many of these chemicals have been banned in developed countries because of their adverse effects, its already wide dispersal in the atmosphere, makes it a potential health hazard for a long time in the future. There have been almost 45 chemicals that have been claimed as endocrine disruptors. Many of these chemicals are considered long-lived organic compounds that can sustain in the environment for decades and cause bioaccumulation in body tissue. This list includes certain insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, industrial chemicals and their byproducts such as dioxin and PCB’s; along with many compounds found in plastics like phthalates and styrenes, which are used in the packaging of food and beverages. c) In conclusion, the book itself ends without any finality and so does this article published by ‘World Resources Institute’ on whether hormone mimics are truly as hazardous as they claim to be. Thus, my stand on the issue is that ‘hormone mimics’ exist but its effects on us are undetermined. Therefore, we need to make the right choices and try to be mutually compatible with our environment. ISSUE 20 - Research a) The article chosen is Superfund: The Shortcut That Failed (http://perc.org/articles/superfund-1) Richard Stroup, in this article states that ‘Superfund’ is a disaster, which was plagued with problems right from its commencement. b) Over 20 years ago, homeowners around a waste site called Love Canal found chemicals seeping into their homes. Without any proper evidence, suggestions were made that these chemicals could cause serious genetic problems and diseases. Immediately the site along with 237 homes and a school were bulldozed to the ground and still there was no proven scientific data that determined the hazards of the place. The response to such a situation was the ‘Superfund’ that was supposed to deal with similar waste sites. He states that these were exaggerated, wasteful and costly claims and mere speculations without scientific proof. Instead of this method, simple actions can be taken, such as – having polluters stop ongoing pollution when there are violation of rights, polluters must pay for the damages caused and cleanups, only in emergency situations removals need to be made that too by the Local and State Governments, judicial review should be made available to both the cause and effected parties. Only these changes can make the ‘Superfund’ a successful prospect according to Richard Stroup. c) In my opinion, it is better to have an exclusive method like ‘Superfund’ on the cleanup process, so that focus is driven solely towards the protection of humans against toxic waste. Other methods which have been tried and proved a failure should be done away with and ones that have been proved to be successful should be implemented. Works Cited Easton, T. A. (2011). Taking sides: Clashing views on environmental issues, (14th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Are hormone mimics affecting our health? | World Resources… http://www.wri.org/publication/content/8345 Superfund: | PERC – The Property and Environmental Research… http://perc.org/articles/superfund-1 Read More