Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Chapter 4: The toxic cradle of productionstream of waste. In <strong>the</strong> domain of production big corporations have consistently andfiercely resisted regulatory ‘intrusion’. As documented by sociologist Andrew Szasz,<strong>the</strong> first waste regulation battles in <strong>the</strong> US, in <strong>the</strong> early 1970s, were fought by analliance of polluters including Dow, Dupont, Union Carbide and various steelmakerson <strong>the</strong> proxy terrain of packaging waste. Dow protested to lawmakers:We object to <strong>the</strong> absolute blanket authority to control productionprocesses and composition … Orderly and timely investment of capitaland replacement of plants would be seriously impeded… it would lock intechnology to any given point in time … create artificial cost and supply/demand distortions … Authority to control production, compositionand distribution of products … would be devastating to free enterprisecommerce. [Quoted in Szasz 1994: 19]Dupont joined <strong>the</strong>m with <strong>the</strong> argument:We believe that <strong>the</strong> disposal of wastes ought to be regulated instead ofregulating <strong>the</strong> nature and use of <strong>the</strong> product or <strong>the</strong> type of manufacturingprocess used … greatest emphasis should be placed on establishing standardswhich assure that <strong>the</strong> ultimate disposal method is satisfactory. [19]And <strong>the</strong> American Petroleum Institute was blunt:No specific requirements or prohibitions should be set governing <strong>the</strong>recovery, reuse or disposal of industrial wastes … Generators should be freeto increase or decrease waste production rates, terminate waste production,treat <strong>the</strong>ir own wastes, and negotiate treatment or disposal service contractsin a free and competitive market. [19]Lawmakers <strong>the</strong>n obediently confined <strong>the</strong>mselves to <strong>the</strong> control of disposal of <strong>the</strong>ever growing waste stream whose production was placed beyond public control. Theimmediate consequence was <strong>the</strong> need for ever more waste disposal facilities and, as <strong>the</strong>Petroleum Institute indicated, fur<strong>the</strong>r opportunities for business to profit as <strong>the</strong> statevacated <strong>the</strong> market for disposal facilities. This in turn led to an explosion of protestsagainst <strong>the</strong> siting of toxic waste dumps – mostly in poor black neighbourhoods – andto <strong>the</strong> growth of a social movement when groups opposing <strong>the</strong>se dumps coalesced into<strong>the</strong> environmental justice movement in <strong>the</strong> US in <strong>the</strong> 1980s.- 80 - groundWork - <strong>Wasting</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nation</strong>