Strawberries as a crop are sensitive to a variety of pests, so most growers fumigate the soil with methyl bromide or other pesticides before they plant. Methyl bromide is fairly nasty stuff (which is why it makes an effective pesticide & fungicide) and in addition it damages the ozone layer. A number of years ago, the EPA called for a phaseout of methyl bromide use to protect the environment, and strawberry farmers were in an uproar, since their crops to some extent depend on the substance. Eventually the farmers got a "critical use exception" and were allowed to continue using the substance in spite of the problems it creates.
A new proposal is to switch from methyl bromide to methyl iodide. The latter doesn't harm the ozone, but is perhaps even nastier. This is a good thing for farmers trying to kill bugs and fungi, but a less good thing when you live or work near (or in) a field where it's been applied. Responding to the pressure to phase out methyl bromide, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation is pushing methyl iodide. It has a couple of strikes against it: first, it's expensive, so smaller farmers couldn't really afford it. Second, its toxicity is so intense that scientists don't believe it can be used safely.
How do we balance these things: ozone, worker health, and strawberries? Lots of issues!
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
New rules for deep water drilling
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar came out with new regulations yesterday to restrict deep water drilling in the Gulf after the last set of regulations were overturned by the courts. They want to be sure that better safeguards are in place, and the information requirements include proof that the equipment will do the job it's designed for and evidence that increased cleanup capacity can and will be on hand when extraction happens.
After the Minerals Management Service was revealed to be literally in bed with the energy industry, we've started learning more about how (little!) this part of our economy was regulated. I hate bureaucracy and red tape as much as the next person, but when we have spills in the Gulf like this we remember why these institutions exist. Adequate regulation is crucial to maximizing social benefits- actual and potential externalities need to be counted alongside profits as part of the value of industry. Obviously profits are, and should be, protected (though in the news we usually hear references to "lost jobs" rather than "lost profits") but some balance needs to be maintained, and if this spill isn't a siren call for more attention to be put on this industry, I don't know what would be.
More opinions on the new regulations are here.
After the Minerals Management Service was revealed to be literally in bed with the energy industry, we've started learning more about how (little!) this part of our economy was regulated. I hate bureaucracy and red tape as much as the next person, but when we have spills in the Gulf like this we remember why these institutions exist. Adequate regulation is crucial to maximizing social benefits- actual and potential externalities need to be counted alongside profits as part of the value of industry. Obviously profits are, and should be, protected (though in the news we usually hear references to "lost jobs" rather than "lost profits") but some balance needs to be maintained, and if this spill isn't a siren call for more attention to be put on this industry, I don't know what would be.
More opinions on the new regulations are here.
Subsidies for oil
Although the US thinks of itself as importing huge amounts of oil (which we obviously do), the Gulf spill has also refocused attention on how much we produce ourselves. Domestic production, when it is adequately regulated, is a wonderful thing. Like many domestic industries, though, it has considerable influence in Congress, and over the years it has secured itself some serious tax breaks. Yesterday's New York Times features an editorial about how once useful but now outdated tax breaks for the oil industry could save taxpayers as much as $80 billion! Hopefully my colleagues who advocate small government will join me in supporting the cutting of these subsidies....
Monday, July 12, 2010
A Miner Point
This quote from an article in today's Washington Post catches my eye:
"The story of 2010 is not that nothing happened after the BP spill, or after the coal-mine explosion that killed 29 in West Virginia on April 5. It's that much of the reaction has focused on preventing accidents -- on tighter scrutiny of rigs and mines -- rather than broader changes in the use of oil and coal."
While the major issue in the article is the failure of environmentalists to use incidents to provoke wider change, I want to talk today about the "miner" issue. I haven't even heard that much of that scrutiny is happening, particularly with respect to the coal mine incident. This US government website says that from 2001-2005 an average of 30 people died each year in coal mines, but 65 died in 2007. 41 have died so far this year in coal mines and another 11 in metal mines.
Given that we're so reliant on coal, it seems likely that the mining companies are getting decent returns on their investments. I'd like to see a little more pressure from the government on companies to turn some profits back to investments in safety! I wonder how the free market contingent feels about OSHA and MSHA. Some West Virginians, for example, often have few economic alternatives, so they can't easily turn down mining jobs- the mining companies are monopsonists (i.e. the only buyers) for people selling their labor. Those are problems with the market process that the government should correct!
"The story of 2010 is not that nothing happened after the BP spill, or after the coal-mine explosion that killed 29 in West Virginia on April 5. It's that much of the reaction has focused on preventing accidents -- on tighter scrutiny of rigs and mines -- rather than broader changes in the use of oil and coal."
While the major issue in the article is the failure of environmentalists to use incidents to provoke wider change, I want to talk today about the "miner" issue. I haven't even heard that much of that scrutiny is happening, particularly with respect to the coal mine incident. This US government website says that from 2001-2005 an average of 30 people died each year in coal mines, but 65 died in 2007. 41 have died so far this year in coal mines and another 11 in metal mines.
Given that we're so reliant on coal, it seems likely that the mining companies are getting decent returns on their investments. I'd like to see a little more pressure from the government on companies to turn some profits back to investments in safety! I wonder how the free market contingent feels about OSHA and MSHA. Some West Virginians, for example, often have few economic alternatives, so they can't easily turn down mining jobs- the mining companies are monopsonists (i.e. the only buyers) for people selling their labor. Those are problems with the market process that the government should correct!
Friday, July 9, 2010
South Asia & Climate Change
Bangladesh faces a huge poverty burden made worse by a lack of water for long periods each year. Adding to the difficulty, wells come up laced with arsenic when someone actually has enough money to drill one. As if that wasn't bad enough, scientists say that climate change is expected to profoundly exacerbate problems across South Asia, says this article in the Wall Street Journal. In just 20 years, the area is expected to lose what amounts to the total amount of fresh water used in the country of Nepal every year- 275 billion cubic meters. Crop yields, including wheat and rice, could drop by 30-50% in India and China. 50-70 million people could end up displaced.
Just thought you'd like to know!
Just thought you'd like to know!
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Horse-powered stables
We can't find enough to do with our chicken poop here in Maryland, but across the "pond" they're working toward a good solution in one place. A military stable will soon be powered entirely by horse manure. The initial cost is significant- I wonder how long it will take to pay itself off, if ever?
Monday, July 5, 2010
China & Climate Change
A 48 percent increase in car sales? In the depressed market of 2009? It's true: in China, car sales are going through the roof. As the 1.3 billion Chinese "warm up" to the joys of consumer capitalism, the climate too is likely to do some significant warming! Tough time to come of age as a country. Sounds like they are doing what they can to improve efficiency, but it will take a lot of efficiency tweaks to bring that many people into a Western lifestyle!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)