Despite environmentalists’ best efforts to preserve the health of the earth, a new study claims that biodegradable products may actually be harmful to the environment. Furthermore, new evidence indicates that "green" buildings are hazardous to human health. Researches behind the discovery do accept climate change and examined the effects of it on indoor air quality. Fox News explains:
The report cautions that climate change can negatively and directly affect indoor air quality in several ways. But the scientists behind the study warn that homeowners and businesses could also be making the problem worse by pursuing untested or risky energy-efficiency upgrades.
The report reads, “Even with the best intentions, indoor environmental quality issues may emerge with interventions that have not been sufficiently well screened for their effects on occupant safety and health.”
According to the report, when buildings are airtight, negative moisture and air problems result. Likewise, asbestos and other harmful materials result when buildings and home are made “green.”
However, the report does not seek to discourage people from making homes and businesses more energy efficient, but rather asks organizations to take note of the side effects of the green upgrades so that the public can make educated decisions.
This is not the first time that environmental efforts have proven to create more problems than they fix. The federal government’s decision to ban incandescent light bulbs has prompted the advocacy of the Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb (CFL) by a number of environmental organizations and the federal government. Unfortunately, the CFL is not exactly environmentally friendly, and is in fact potentially harmful to humans. The New American’s Bill Jasper explains:
Each bulb contains a small amount of mercury. You know, the element that greenies get hysterical over when even miniscule traces show up in tuna or other seafood. They insist that coal-fired electrical plants must be shut down because they produce relatively small amounts of mercury. Yet, many of the same activists are advocating that billions of traditional incandescent light bulbs be replaced with mercury-containing CFLs. In fact, they joined with GE in a multi-million dollar lobbying campaign to pressure Congress to mandate that Americans must switch all of our light bulbs. But what happens to the environment when billions of CFLs are disposed of in landfills? And what happens when one breaks a CFL in the home, office, hospital, or school classroom?
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the process of cleaning up a broken CFL bulb requires a series of complicated steps that vary depending on the surface on which the light bulb is broken. One of the procedures asks that the room in which the bulb is broken be cleared of people and animals for a minimum of 15 minutes.
Another environmental effort that is a monumental failure, both environmentally and economically, is the conversion of corn to ethanol in order to limit greenhouse gases. Clean New Power explains:
In theory, the advantage over fossil fuels is that plants will absorb C02 as they grow. It is then released again, when burning the fuel, so this should be a carbon neutral process. But in reality, it depends on the efficiency of the production process. If you burn coal to create electricity that is used by an ethanol plant then the net emission of greenhouse gases could be higher than if you just burned gasoline. And then you still have to produce the fertilizers.
Another environmental effort heavily endorsed by the Left, environmentalists, and the Obama administration, despite its environmental, health, and economic failures, is cap and trade. Bill Gallegos, Executive Director of Communities for a Better Environment, indicates, “We have even more evidence now that cap and trade does not work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the European Union, emissions have increased by 3 percent in the past year under their program, and we also know that cap and trade has the worst impact on health in low income communities and communities of color.”
Despite the vast evidence against these numerous environmental efforts, it seems safe to assume that the Left and environmentalists will continue to push them as better alternatives to the status quo. And the government, in all its inefficient glory, will comply as usual.
