Photo by Gecko
I am a believer in keeping the air we breathe, water we drink, and land we live on clean and safe. That's just called common sense. I am also a believer in the assertion that we're not doing the best we can at this task and that we could do much better. That's just called paying attention. But here's just another example of the thing about environmentalism that turns me and a lot of other people off:
A government report that found old-fashioned reusable nappies damage the environment more than disposables has been hushed up because ministers are embarrassed by its findings.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has instructed civil servants not to publicise the conclusions of the £50,000 nappy research project and to adopt a “defensive” stance towards its conclusions.
The report found that using washable nappies, hailed by councils throughout Britain as a key way of saving the planet, have a higher carbon footprint than their disposable equivalents unless parents adopt an extreme approach to laundering them.
Source: Times Online
H/T: Matt Drudge
It is easy to deduce from their actions, that these "environmentalist" bureaucrats are less than sincere in their interest to keep the environment we live in clean and healthy. If that were their true, overriding concern, they would have retracted their previous statements and worked to raise awareness of these new findings, with the effect of lessening Britain's carbon footprint. Instead, they have shown that their own reputation and narcissism is what they consider most at stake, or else the power they wield to influence and meddle in the lives of others- or both.
I hear far too many examples of this sort of thing going on not to be disenchanted with much of what passes for environmentalism out there.
2 comments:
I see what you're getting at, but this is a pretty silly post. You are implicitly buying into the logic of the GW crowd- less carbon = environmentally good.
In overall environment impact, pollution, waste, resource uses (ie, all the environmental factors that actually matter), reusables are undoubtedly better than disposables...who cares what their hypothetical carbon footprint is?
There's still no reason or excuse for trying to hush up the information.
I'm not sure I buy your argument though. I thought that anthropogenic, carbon-driven, global warming (with its inevitable apocalypse) was a pet theory of most "environmentalists."
Post a Comment