Why do we continue to make things that are bad for the environment?

Question

An excellent example of my question is hairspray products. It was determined that aerosol cans were hurting the ozone layer and so they made plastic pump spray bottles...but yet they never stopped making the aerosol cans. Why? Something was deemed bad for the environment, an acceptable substitute was made to replace it, but instead of replacing it, we now have the either or option. In my opinion this is an extreme waste of our resources. Why have both when we only need one? I know personal preference plays a role here, but when our environment is at stake, I think personal preference should take the back burner. Instead of spending the money to manufacture 2 different bottles of the same product, one in an aerosol can and one in a plastic bottle, would it not be cheaper to put all resources into making ONE plastic bottle? Thus saving on time and labor and making the one product cheaper? This theory goes for all things, not just hair spray...hairspray is just an example...

Answer 1

The basic question would be "Who will be the one to determine what items should be eliminated?"

Gasoline vehicles are bad for the environment so should there only be very small electric cars?

Some say everyone should be a vegan because it is better for the environment. OK?

Airplanes are bad for the environment. Eliminate long distance travel?

Most entertainment is not environmentally friendly like sports events, music concerts. Get rid of them?

Who decides and where do they draw the line?

Answer 2

Manufactures like Proctor and Gamble for instance, make products to make money, that is the bottom line period. They could care less about the environment, or peoples health, only filling their pockets. The government agency that controls household and personal care products, is the FDA, and they actually have very little control over it. The law that covers these products, dates back to the early 1900's before these dangers chemicals were even thought of. The only way that the FDA can ban something is if it has been shown to say kill someone, like lead for instance. Then the manufactures get around that, by building their factory's in places like China, that do not have those kinds of controls. These manufactures also have huge lobbyist, that make sure that these manufactures can go on using these hazardous chemicals, and that the laws do not get changed. The manufacturer's of these products are actually responsible for testing their own products, to make sure they are safe for humans and the environment. How ironic is that! There are millions of chemicals that manufactures use, and only a small percent have ever been tested, to make sure they are safe for humans let alone the environment. Europe and Canada are actually some what farther advanced in protecting people, and the environment from these hazardous chemicals. They have ban several hazardous chemicals, that are allowed in the U.S.A. They also make manufactures put on the label such things as, the chemicals in this product have been known to cause cancer, or asthma. Now if you had a choice of buying one that said this can cause cancer or asthma, and one that was safe, which one would you purchase? It is my understanding that CA. has tried to caution people from buying hazardous chemical products. Places like WalMart, have to post a sign outside of the store, stating that there are products that contain hazardous chemicals inside this store. People do not seem to pay much attention to it however, they either do not take the time to read it, or do not understand that they are referring to bath room cleaners, laundry detergent, dish washer detergent, aerosols, kitchen cleaners, bleach, ammonia, Lysol sprays, air fresheners, and that is just to name a few. The answer that I personally have come up with is, changing my own shopping, buying only products that are safer, more natural, and biodegradable. If enough people change over to these kinds of products, this will show the manufactures, what the public is looking for. The old supply and demand steps in, if there is no demand for these hazardous products, then it will not be profitable for manufacturer's to supply them.

Answer 3

The aerosols we use today do not contain the same stuff they did prior to 1970. They banned cfcs and therefore they are much less damaging to the ozone layer. But i agree that people use many things that are bad for the environment. For example every piece of white paper we use has come from a paper mill that uses chlorine and dioxins to bleach the paper. Dioxins have a half life of 10 000 years and are known to bio accumulate and bio magnify. We continue to cut down trees all over the world for paper and for firewood. Their are millions of thing people do that are bad but when we do these things we should way up the advantages and disadvantages including environmental and social impacts. This is not done and often the only considerations are money and political gain.

Answer 4

Because people are stupid enough to continue using the products. They think the medically enhanced titties on the commercials must be telling the truth, not the boring old scientists.

Another example is skin care products. The petro-concoctions in these products are known to lead to early aging, skin cancer, chromosmal damage, birth defects, thyroid disorders, and more, but people slather this stuff on like oil before an all-girl wrestling match. Bet the talking titties won't have to declare this at the end of the commercial message, will they? And all this stuff flushed right on out into our environment to cause even more harm to everyone, even those that choose not to use these products.

How about cleaning products that are known to exacerbate allergies, asthma and by dermal absorption and inhalation cause all kind of problems with all sorts of human cellular functions? I'm sure you have some of that in your house. And again, whatever isn't absorbed by your body or left in your home environment, gets flushed right into our rivers and streams - poisoning our water supply.

You use this stuff, I'm pretty sure. If you continue to use it, companies continue to profit from it. If you suffer the consequences of using it, we all get to suffer with high health care expenses and higher taxes to support those without health care.

And even worse, the natural alternatives are just as (if not more) effective and far less expensive in addition to being better for your body, health and environment.

Changes start in your own home. Rather than complain about what others are doing, try looking at the products you use every day that have a negative impact on your health, your home environment and our environment.

If you aren't part of the problem, you're part of the solution.

Answer 5

Because people want things for cheap and think that it is someone else's responsibility to change the world. Each individuals actions contribute towards the demand for products they buy. For example, every time the price of gasoline goes up, people claim "price gouging" and "big profits" for oil companies. The higher the price the less consumption of a good (Law of Supply and Demand). People should cheer when gas goes up. It should be 5 times the price it is when considering the costs associated with impacts on the environment and human life. Both liberals and consevative are hypocrites and are just one different type of bs from the other.

Answer 6

I could not have said it better myself. You are exactly right. Unfortunately, people continue to buy the products that are bad for the environment, so companies continue to make them. It's all about money, and it drives me insane. You should talk to people and tell them about ways they can help the environment, and emphasize that major environmental benefits can be had with very little change in lifestyle, and your hairspray is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

Answer 7

Businesses are generally not interested in preserving the environment they want to turn a profit. What sells most is what they will produce regardless of harm-full effects. The only way (using your example) to eliminate aerosol cans is for the government to step in and ban them. Even companies that claim to help the environment are still just in it for profit they just want environment conscious consumers to purchase their products. This is what capitalism is about, get rich and screw everyone else.

Answer 8

Yea street lamps are bad for the environment, think of the wasted energy being used when every one is home in bed.

Answer 9

Because people want short-term gratification without regard for long-term effects on themselves or other people.

Answer 10

people are too ignorant and they don't care what is ahead of us. They only care about the present. then, when the time comes, they all regret. Also, people are too selfish.