Basic HTML Version
defecl s. Physicians in lhe area
reporledly have noticed an upsu rge
in birlh defects in the year afler l he
spraying.
Roadside dumping would seem
lO be a common practice among
illegal dumpers. Chemical was tes
have cven been dumped along the
New J ersey T urnpike.
Solutlons Now?
Much of l he chemical dumping
pracliced over the past four
decades was probably legal.
("Probably," because lawyers can
argue forever about these things.)
Yet as of 1979, only a mere 1
O
percent of hazardous wastes was
trealed in ways t hat would be legal
under laws that went into effect in
1980.
T he 1980 laws req u i re an
impermeable barrier between waste
and groundwater. T hey requ ire
moni lori ng of the dump si le, as
well as fencing of the site. They
requi re a system for captur ing
escaping discharges. Violators face
$25,000-a-day fine and lail sen–
tences.
Yet the laws exempt the toxic
wastes of small businesses, such as
d ry cleaners and gasoline stations,
and there are few licensed waste–
d isposal sites avai lable. Moreover,
in an ironic twist, the new laws
may have prompted an increase in
illegal, on-land dumping, as pro–
ducers of waste hurried to beat
the deadline by dumping waste
secret ly.
Thus lhere is ser ious ques tion
about t he possibi lity, muc h less
the practicality, of
proper
waste
disposal. Theoreticall y, as one
state gover nment wan ted one
manufact urer to do, you could dig
out everything al ready in a dump,
plus the su rrounding contam i–
na ted soi l, install 10-foot
el
ay
vaults on the site, and then put
back the waste (most of it in bar–
reis) and so il. O bvious ly t h is
woul d be inc redibl y expensive,
and only l he largest and most vis–
ible manufacturers would have the
money to do it.
High temperature incinerat ion is
another way to d ispose of waste, a
method that sorne of the larger
companies have used for 40 years.
Preferably this is done in ships out
in the middle of the ocean. T his
26
incineration itself results in ai r pol–
lution!
But there are those who believe
that there is no satisfactory answer
to waste dumping. An EPA offi–
cial, Gary
N.
Diet r ich, has said :
"There's no completely safe land
disposal. Anyt ime you put hazard–
ous waste on the ground , it will
event ua ll y leak in to d rin ki ng
water." At any rate, the fu ture
expense of careful chemical waste
dumping will entail dreadful cost,
be it in higher prices, lost jobs, fall–
en production or a "poorer" econo–
my.
Whenever we escape f rom
labor, whether it be in
plastic products, fossil
fuels for cars or modern
power to run refrigerators,
limitations pop up in a
new form: hazardous
waste, air pollution or
dangerous radiation.
Wisdom to salve our
problems has escaped the
ingenuity of man.
' '
Man Apart f rom God
Chemical waste dumping confronts
this world with hard choices.
People want plastics, synthetic
materials, and insect icide-protected
food. Were the various chemical
and manufacturing companies that
produce waste to stop producing
the stuff tomorrow, we would all be
immensely poorer.
Asbestos, for example, is deadly
stuff. I t is highly cancer-causing.
Yet it is the
only
effective mater ial
for brake linings. Shall we do wi th–
out cars? Most of us could not
withou t losing our homes or ou r
jobs or both .
DDT also causes cancer. Yet its
use has saved mi llions of people
from malaria.
l f all American farms were lO
stop using pesticides, herbicides
and fungicides tomorrow, food out–
put would be cut in half. Countless
mi ll ions who depend on U.S. food
exports would face fami ne.
Any semblance of civilized li fe
for mi llions of people depends on
an industrial base that produces
hor rendous, toxic wastes.
Why is it that, in this world,
mater ial abundance seems to create
horrible pollut ion? Wby can't we
have cars and chemical goods with–
out smog and loxic waste? Wñy are
efforts to clean up pollution so cost–
ly-often causing either workers to
lose their jobs or the price of prod–
ucts to skyrocket? We have, proba–
bly, overlooked how these human
troubles began.
When the f irst man, Adam,
chose to eat of the forbidden tree in
the garden of Eden
thereby signify–
ing his desire to live apart from
God,
humankind cut itself off from
the ullimate source of t rue knowl–
edge and also, consequent ly, carne
under cer tain physical limits. After
Adam's sin every advance that
mankind has made, it seems, is paid
for in sorne kind of hardship.
Chemicals make life easier- but
they also threaten life itself. S ince
A dam's sin,
every good thing
exacts a high cost.
Whenever we escape from labor,
whether it be in plas t ic products,
fossi l fue ls for ou r cars or modern
power to ru n our refrigerators, lim–
itations pop up in a new form: haz–
ardous waste, air pollution or dan–
gerous radiation. Wisdom to solve
our problems has escaped the inge–
nuity of man.
Where There ls No Vision the
Water ls Polluted
The Bible sets forth ecological laws
for life in this world today. T he
basic pri ncipie of properly dispos–
ing of
organic
waste is found in
Deu teronomy 23: 12- 13, a reference
to the disposal of human waste. The
principie, of cou rse, is
isolation
of
wastes from human contact. Thus,
in extending the principie, it con–
demos open pit, roadside dumping
or dumping into rivers, lakes or
wells.
Another basic ecological princi–
The
PLAIN TRUTH