When Pigs Fly

So Wal-Mart is going green:

The factories in China are going to end up having to be held up to the same standards as the factories in the U.S. There will be a day of reckoning for retailers. If somebody wakes up and finds out that children that are down the river from that factory where you save three cents a foot in the cost of garden hose are developing cancers at significant rates -- so that the American public can save three cents a foot -- those things won't be tolerated, and they shouldn't be tolerated.

Time will tell as to whether or not Wal-Mart’s plunge into sustainability is for real, or if it’s just running interference for the Administration trying to rein in juggernaut China, using labor and environmental standards as economic weapons. It would be more compelling if Wal-Mart also gave some thought about low, low prices driving out local businesses and creating a class of working poor in this country.

A cynical view would be that corporate social responsibility, including sustainability goals, is not consistent with the goals of a for-profit company. Some would argue that’s the way it should be – corporate self-interest and public good can coexist in an environment with a competitive marketplace and fair pricing. That’s a mighty big assumption, though.

Corporate social responsibility for a lot of companies is a media relations tool for enhancing their image, with increased market share as the end-game. However, some would argue that increasing market share is not aligned with sustainability, no matter how you dress it up. Big companies have the power to push on their suppliers to be greener (“greening the supply chain”), but who pushes on the big companies?

That’s our job.

Fun with High-Fructose Corn Syrup

Via Robot Wisdom Weblog, I checked into a post on Sprol about high-fructose corn syrup. It’s engaging but a little over the top (HFCS a carcinogen? Developmental toxicant? Associated with cirrhosis in humans?). However, it is thought-provoking about how pervasive HFCS is in the food supply, and how it behaves in the body, especially when you look at it in light the proportion of overweight and obese people in America.

What We Say – What We Do

An interesting juxtaposition of stories in the news this week: at the same time that the EPA released draft regulations designed to make New Source Review “work better” (yes, the usual critics note this would result in less aggressive enforcement and more emissions from aging utility plants), a Harris poll was released this week reporting nearly three-quarters of U.S. adults agree that protecting the environment is important and standards cannot be too high.

I’m not going to recite the statistics from the poll, because it just doesn’t hold my interest that much. I stopped paying attention to the survey the moment I observed there were no questions asking people what they would change in their lives to help protect the environment. If those questions were asked, you might find there is little in their lives that Americans would be willing to change or forego, regardless how they say that environmental protection is important to them. Yes, I know that SUV sales are down. It’s about time; why were we buying them at all?

Writings such as “The Death of Environmentalism” chronicle this vast disconnect between our professed concerns about impact to the environment and our own role in creating those impacts. If three quarters of adult Americans feel that environmental protection is important, what is it that marginalizes the environmental movement? Some of it is the movement’s fault, as noted by Shellenberger and Nordhaus. Some of it’s a lack of environmental literacy – being unable to link the actions in our daily lives to occurrences such as global warming, resource depletion, mobidity and mortality from air pollution. But, there’s probably a lot of good old fashioned willingness to disbelieve:

How do you stop such suicidal behavior? Probably not by persuasion or exhortation. People change what they are doing when circumstances compel them to and not before. The American public barely even thinks about these things.

A little harsh (that’s James Howard Kunstler for you), but look at things this way; how much of an effect are you having when switching from a Yukon Denali to a Prius, if you are still commuting 500 miles a week to and from work?

Tidbits and Blue Screen of Death Blues

I got the computer back from the shop mid-last week. They couldn't reproduce the BSOD error (think about taking the car to the mechanic, saying you heard it making a noise, and the car doesn't make that noise for the mechanic. . .). Two hours after getting back home with the computer, there it is, BSOD. I returned to the shop the next day, this time leaving the error up on the screen so there is no mistaking it. They'll let me know in a day or two, so we're still on light blogging schedule.

Todays tidbits:

Earlier this week, Dangerousmeta posted on the Bush Administration's thoughts about using federal troops to enforce quarantines, should we start experiencing avian flu epidemics. What I wanted to draw your attention to is the "Model State Emergency Powers Act".

The Memoryhole has in a downloadable form the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) lost work day injury and illness (LWDII) rates at about 80,000 worksites in selected high-hazard industries across the country. Apparently OSHA has not disclosed data on a worksite basis, citing privacy issues, but they've been released under court order. The database covers the years 1996 to 2002.

Further bulletins as events warrant.

Light Blogging Ahead

As if it wasn't already apparent, the posting has been nearly nonexistent over the past few weeks. Pressing matters at work, including lots of travel, have been the principal cause. In addition, the computer I use for writing gave me the blue screen of death on Friday, and is now in the shop for data reclamation and repair. The outcome is guardedly optimistic. So, posting will continue to be light, though please check back, and feel free to dip into the archives and blogroll.

Until then, I leave you with this tidbit. If this article is to be believed, there is a trend towards viewing eco-activism as acts of domestic terrorism. This is disturbing - while those favoring "direct action" can become a law enforcement problem, is it reasonable to lump them in with Timothy McVeigh and Al-Qaeda? Then again, these are not reasonable times.

Stand by. I'll be back before too long.