COMMENT pubs.acs.org/est
Finding Common Ground
T
wo poor farmers lived next door to each other during the Depression. But one farmer’s fortune changed dramatically when he had a bumper crop and his old cow began to give huge quantities of milk. Jealous and confused at the good fortune of his neighbor, the other farmer barely muddled through. As fate would have it, one day he stumbled upon a magic lamp. The genie in the lamp offered to grant him one wish, anything he desired. “What would you like?” asked the genie. Without hesitation, the poor farmer replied, “I’d like my neighbor’s milk cow to die”. So it is with the Democrats and the Republicans in Congress. They can’t seem to tolerate any prosperity for the other side. Environmental issues are no exception. We haven’t made any progress on major environmental legislation since the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996. Stalemates exist on climate, energy, and water quality. For example, lack of progress on controlling greenhouse gas emissions leaves European countries as the only serious players. Yet, the first commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012, short of its goal, while global emissions are still rising. Can’t we find some common ground for compromise with so much at stake? There really is broad room for agreement. Historically, most major environmental legislation in the U.S. passes during election years, so from now through 2012 is prime time for progress. Both parties can agree on the importance of the following principles (I think): • Securing greater energy independence • Adapting to changing climate • Preserving ecosystem services • Conserving land and resources • Creating jobs It's widely accepted that sovereign countries have a right to pursue food, water, and energy security. The U.S. wants energy independence, to be sure. Enter... the biggest energy story of the 21st century, that is, the recovery of tightly bound natural gas from shale deposits deep beneath the surface of the ground. But in order to exploit those resources, the oil and gas industry must be regulated much more closely by EPA. Let’s embark on a new U.S. energy policy by fully utilizing natural gas, renewable energy sources, and efficiency where economical. Everybody wins, and jobs will be created. In talks around the country, I find that legislators will not even discuss climate change. Fine. (We’ll talk later when we raise our collective heads from the sand.) But people are open to the notion of adapting to climate change (whatever may be its cause). To them, climate change is defined as that strange and foreboding weather we are now experiencing—tornadoes, floods, droughts, and forest fires which are becoming increasingly annoying (and severe). Let’s pass history-making legislation, The U.S. Infrastructure Renaissance Act, to renew our water and transportation infrastructure (which is crumbling) and we’ll do it by designing smart networks and resiliency to climate change as an integral part of the system. Think of the jobs created! r 2011 American Chemical Society
Only one piece of legislation in the U.S. is designed to protect species, The Endangered Species Act. But it has become cumbersome to enforce and bogged-down in the courts. Besides, it was never meant to ensure the welfare of the myriad common plants and animals which make life on this planet so rich and wonderful. Imagine launching a major initiative by the Interior and Commerce Departments in collaboration to calculate the value of ecosystem services, and then using that result to design programs for habitat enhancement and improvement. Everyone is for conservation. Aren’t conservatives the greatest advocates for conservation? Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, placed 230 million acres of land under U.S. protection during his presidency. And shouldn’t Democrats favor liberal ideas like protecting resources? After all, Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, instituted the Civilian Conservation Corps, employing 2.5 million people who planted millions of trees and improved park infrastructure everywhere. Let’s think big—the U.S. Civilian Conservation Act of 2012—to employ the people, conserve marginal lands, produce renewable energy through small wind and solar projects, reuse wastewater, and recycle material resources. To finance the program, we’ll implement a carbon tax, sending the proper energy price signal into the marketplace to conserve energy. But it will be offset by lowering the payroll tax, a tax on personal productivity. Something for the Ds as well as the Rs. And along the way, we’ll create millions of quality jobs. Must the neighbor’s cow always die? There’s plenty of room for common ground. Let’s go find it.
Jerald L. Schnoor Editor-in-Chief
’ AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author
[email protected].
Published: June 03, 2011 5455
dx.doi.org/10.1021/es2017973 | Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 5455–5455
