Drives Blog

You Said:"operating a business in an environmentally responsible way may no longer be an option. "

I guess they'll just have to figure out how to operate them in an environmentally irresponsible way.

My nominees for examples to show how to no longer be responsible would be US DEPT Of ENERGY Nuclear Plants;

BP Refinery in Texas- oh never mind that was human safety, not really Environmental.

GM- Claiming a hybrid Tahoe as Green Technology at 12 miles per gallon Highway, 10 city at the local auto show. And many other "Green marketing implied messages"; Lets see what proportion of your sales come from actual Green vehicles, GM, and how much from Belchomatic ga$ guzzler$.

Any one else have any nominees for 'good' examples?

tegus

"The terms 'environmentally responsible' and 'financially rewarding' haven't typically..."

I live in Ohio, and have seen, firsthand, the devastation that trying to be "environmentally responsible" and still accomplish "financially rewarding" can cause. The people of Youngstown, Ohio, for instance, used to complain about the smoke that belched daily from the steel mills located there. The solution was to install costly equipment to try to eliminate the smoke discharge. Unfortunately, there was another solution - BLIGHT.

If you had seen Youngstown in the earlier days when the smoke was belching, you would have seen a town that was twice the population it is today. You would have seen activity on the streets, money in everyone's account and employment at a high level. And, of course, a layer of red dust on nearly every car, house, tree, fence and anything within a rather large radius of the steel mills.

What price is commensurate with the prosperity of a city to have pristine air and streams? I would venture that a lot of the people who lived in or are living in Youngstown would dearly love to see that beautiful smoke again. But that is not "environmentally responsible."

I am sure there are many other similar stories affecting other towns in other states, but this is an example about which I am personally familiar. There must be some balance between the two ideals: environmental responsibility and financial responsibility. Can we continue to endeavor to clean the air and waterways at the cost of devastation of our cities and towns?

This might be a great topic for discussion here on CR4. "Can the engineering community come up with a balance between environmental responsibility and financial responsibility?"

The short answer is that with the disappearance of the smoke went the jobs that created that smoke. That smoke didn't just appear on the horizon one day. It was the result of thousands of steel workers. Youngstown, Ohio, wasn't the only casualty of the failing steel industry. There were others. Some were hurt worse than others.

I am sure that you are correct in that the people of these devasted cities and towns were much less interested in the environment than they were the money the steel industry provided for the town. The environment was the last thing they were worried about back then. That, as you have pointed out, iwa a gross mistake, but the reality nontheless.

The current state of affairs regarding the environment and its relation to the idustrial "revolution" has caught the American worker between a rock and a hard place. No one wants to pollute the Earth. However, when the invoice is sent for the clean-up or even the prevention of the pollution, few if any people want to step up to the plate and offer their own money for remediation. The prevelant feeling is that "As long as I don't see it, it's not my problem." The fact remains, though, that it is everyone's problem.

That being said, I still feel there is a way for the two to co-exist. We, as a people, must be able to utilize the resources that we have available to us and then clean up our mess at the end or as we go along. And, AND, we must be able to do it without bankrupting the manufacturing community. There is a way. I assume, from what you have told me, that this is your primary endeavor. I hope it works.