What can we do to prevent "good intentions" of environmentalists from doing more harm than good?

Question

I am sure most environmentalists believe they are doing a good thing with their cause. But it has been shown time and time again that oftentimes they end up doing more harm than good. What can we do to prevent future misshaps?

Here is the latest example.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070608/ap_on_re_us/tire_reef_blunder

Dana, personal attacks won't change the fact it is largely the environmental movement that is reponsable for thousands of deaths from malaria.

Also it is largely the fault of environmentalists that we don't use more nuclear power.

@Bob I agree that sensible environmentalists have done much good as well, but sometimes they do end up going to far as is the case here.

avial_skillz. perhaps you should get some more skillz and read this article.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol3no3/roberts.htm

Answer 1

I don't see the Environmentalist angle you're touting in that story. What I do see is well-intentioned but misinformed corporations trying to get around the no-dumping laws. I wonder what the (real) Environmentalists at the time thought of this plan.

To prevent future mishaps, I think "we" should listen to real environmentalists and not just those groups in league with earth-destroying corporations. I also think "we" should be leery anytime a group claims to have the best interest of the environment in mind and advocates a plan that involves the introduction of massive amount of unnatural material into a foreign eco-system. "We" should insist that any course of action be backed up with science - and not just the scientists of one particular group or the corporations backing it - to prove that it is, indeed, healthy for the environment.

And, again, this is not an example of environmentalists doing more harm than good but an example of what happens when large corporations (Good Year) co-opt the interests of well-intentioned groups.

Answer 2

<>

You can't possibly be referring to the ban on DDT, that is still reaking havock on the environment of countries that still use it, while it has very little effect on the mosquitos it is being used on!?

If it would have been forseen that tropical storms would have displaced the tires that deep in the ocean, i doubt anyone would have done it, well other than the tire companies.

people like you have nothing better to do, than to parrot dubious talking points to discredit environmentalists? what else do you do besides running around yahoo attempting to portray balance of logic, only in an attempt to keep what little credibility you have, when attacking environmentalists?

this tire thing was a great idea( if it would or could have have worked), but unfortunately when man vs nature is concerned nature doesn't usually cooperate with man, that is why it is usally best to work with her.

i never have trusted or approved of dumping trash into the ocean to make reafs or islands without knowing the facts first, but corporations who benefit from such ideas will push it through no matter who disproves.

how is it environmentalists' fault that we don't use more nuclear power? I think it is more the fault of collective paranoia based on the Chernobyl incident. Its kind of hard to make people feel at ease about having one of those things near them when we all know the devestation that was caused by the Chernobyl meltdown, even if technology is better now.

the real question is what can we do to prevent people like you from doing more harm than good when attempting to discredit environmentalists??!

Answer 3

Just listen to the scientists. It may not always work, but it's the best guide we've got. Would you rather listen to industry? Or politicians?

By the way, while some projects go wrong, the environmentalists are usually right on the big things. In the past 30 years, the environmentalists have brought the world vastly cleaner water and air. 40 years ago, those were going downhill fast.

On global warming, the scientists speak here:

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf

because:

"The drafting of reports by the world’s pre-eminent group of climate scientists is an odd process. For many months scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tussle over the evidence. Nothing gets published unless it achieves consensus. This means that the panel’s reports are extremely conservative – even timid. It also means that they are as trustworthy as a scientific document can be."

George Monbiot

Or see this:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,481085,00.html

EDIT: @nikolassc - I agree that this project bombed. If you try to do things about a problem, that's going to happen sometimes. We're human.

Answer 4

what about non environmentalists doing harm
or does that not come in to the picture
or to turn it around what about non environmentalists doing good for the Environment
put things in to perspective
don't just take some cases in isolation

This is the mentality that kept the Witch hunts going .

But fine ,there should be a comity that has to pass ever bodies proposals ,after evaluation ,
does that sound OK.

Maybe then offenders who continue anyway and if the results are fatal ,get sentenced to death ,

Very publicly with music and stuff would that make you happy after all we are dealing with life and death situations .

However ,we also want to compost the Non Environmentalists who do harm .that is only fair don't you think.

,In this Brave New dangerous world we must employ Brave and drastic measures,Anything else will not work.


Or do you have a better solution

Answer 5

Dumping of tires into the ocean by a group called Broward Artificial Reef Inc., which had the approval of the Army Corps of Engineers and support from Goodyear, does not sound like a project started by environmentalists to me. It sounds like a cheap way to dispose of old tires that played the environmentalists for dupes.

Answer 6

interior the spirit of finished disclosure, i like animals extra beneficial than i like human beings and that i became born in a tree. That pronounced, i do no longer think of you may lump all "environmentalists" right into a team. Generalizations are in many circumstances incorrect! i for my section examine all the question and on an identical time as concept-scary, it fairly is a splash one-sided. Blaming environmentalists for the CA wildfires is purely as stupid as blaming God. It got here approximately. there became a loss of rain for a protracted time. international warming, i do no longer understand yet "in many circumstances" flora tend to burn extra whilst they are no longer getting water. fairly we desire some thing referred to as easy sense. a number of those assets proprietors could have spoken up yet possibly they have been too busy having lattes at Starbucks? on an identical time as do California yuppies reason extra harm than good? (LOL) And hindsight's 20/20, huh?

Answer 7

Sounds like it has nothing to do with environmentalism.

Hmm, conveniently get rid of 700,000 used tires by dumping them in the ocean!? Sounds like the kind of sham environmentalism that big business will do when they get a chance, like the ethanol fuel movement.

Next thing you know, they'll be blaming environmentalists for suburban sprawl, since all those transit-resistant McMansions were made with CFLs and efficient appliances!

Answer 8

Become an environmentalist. It's a big tent, and many environmentalists don't agree with each other (e.g., Earth First and Natural Capitalists), and that's OK.

Answer 9

You're absolutely correct. A similar thing happened in my home town.

We HAD a beautiful beach you could drive right out onto. The town decided that they needed a breakwall to protect the beach from storms, with the town engineers blessing they built one. If they had asked me, a trained geologist, they might have found out their breakwall would cause turbulance behind it. The wave action around the end of the breakwall eroded the beach away. Now you have to drive about 10 miles to the other end of the beach for access.

"Environmentalists" don't interfere with nature. It is naive people with good intentions and bad information who call themselves envirnonmentalists who interfere with nature.

Answer 10

Oh wow, you found one example of a well-intentioned environmentalist plan not working. Well gee, based on your global warming skepticism logic, that must mean that all environmentalists do more harm than good!

I think what we should do is nuke the entire planet, starting with your house. That'll stop those damn environmentalists and their evil good intentions.