Author Archives: Eric Kramer

Posts by Eric Kramer

Eric Kramer Weekly Response 3

The way government regulation is currently set up in regards to the environment is clearly not working. What Mobil was able to do, even after getting caught multiple times and receiving numerous warnings is perfect evidence of current government regulation procedure failing.

The government caught Mobil three times discharging benzene containing waste into open-air ponds without a permit. After catching them once, the government should have the power to force Mobil to stop committing the violation and find an alternative way. After getting caught the second time, the government should be able to institute crippling fines to destroy the company. If the company manages to recover, it should be mandated and enforced that they must continue using an approved method for waste disposal.

The fact that Mobil altered their test results to make it seem as if they did not detect hazardous benzene levels is insane. Mobil should have been shut down for committing serious fraud. The other side of this is that the economy and our government rely so much on these large corporations that shutting one down would be detrimental to our economy and the government.

It did make me a little happy to learn that Mobil was forced to pay fines in the end. The problem with fines is that they are so insignificant to these large corporations that bring in an annual profit of over 40 billion dollars. Mobil was fined 11.2 million dollars, which is nothing for them.

This is very similar to fines in professional sports. In the NFL, player safety has become the primary focus, so fines have started being handed out for outlandish illegal hits. The problem is that since these players are making millions of dollars, small fines of a few thousand dollars are insignificant to these players. They shake it off without much care. The NFL has recognized this, and has considered implementing suspensions as punishment as well. This may actually work because players do not want to miss games.

I found it fascinating that we used radioactive metals that we found in the Central Park Lake to date the layers of water. Radioactive metals have specific half-lives so you can use simple math to determine how long they have been there. The scientists were able to date the layers very accurately, which helped us determine if leaded gasoline was the reason for lead being so prevalent in the air.

Based on the test results, we reasoned that leaded gasoline was not the reason for so much lead being present and that there must have been other causes. This leads to the question where did the lead come from? Did we need to remove lead from gasoline, or could we still be using leaded gasoline today?

We need to find the answers to these questions because they will affect our lifestyle. Leaded gasoline would be cheaper (I think) than unleaded gasoline because it costs money to remove the lead and dispose of it. This would help citizens save money on gasoline and have more money to spend on other items. It would also present the next step to removing lead from the air and preventing it from filling the air again because we would know where it primarily came from. Hopefully, eventually we can just send all of our pollutants to space and be rid of them forever.

Weekly Response 2: Eric Kramer

Before Monday’s class, I had no knowledge of the pollution problem in the bay of Rio de Janeiro. I think it is outrageous that all this pollution has occurred without any sort of regulation and attribution. Rio de Janeiro now has the privilege of hosting the World Cup and the Olympics in two and four years, respectively. I can see two distinct possibilities that could play out.

Hopefully, since the entire world will be watching, Rio de Janeiro will begin remedying the pollution problem in order to make their city appear beautiful, as it should, as opposed to a polluted mess. There is a problem with this scenario however, which leads into the other possibility.

Rio de Janeiro is going to have to spend millions and millions of dollars to prepare the city to host the World Cup and especially the Olympics. The city will have to work hard to build stadiums for the different events and clean up he streets in time for the thousands that will venture to Rio de Janeiro to watch the World Cup and the Olympics. Since all this money is going to be spent for preparation purposes, it is going to be difficult to find funds for cleaning up the pollution problem in the bay. Perhaps afterwards, if Rio de Janeiro makes a significant profit from all of tourists it attracts for the Olympics, funds will open up to fuel this project. If not, unfortunately this pollution problem will continue to grow and the bay will only get worse until the entire ecosystem is beyond repair.

This idea of money driving decision-making is crucial. We live in a time where people mostly care about themselves in the now, and could care less about paving the way for future generations. Since people only think about themselves, particularly big companies and corporations, most are willing to cut corners and take the cheaper (easy) way out, as opposed to the environmentally friendly alternative. A major example is the dumping of PCBs into the Hudson. This is an unacceptable way of getting rid of waste and needs to be regulated in a way that actually works including crippling fines. I think it is good that we have finally started removing the PCBs, and made a plan to ship them off to the Southwest. While this is not an ideal solution, it is the best one available. I do not like the idea of having these PCBs travel in railcars through half the country, but it is a necessary measure. Hopefully, this is the last we ever hear of PCBs.

Many people feel that there is no point in conserving now for the benefit of the future, because those of us living now will be long gone by the time we suffer the consequences of our current actions. While this is a very tempting notion, it is unacceptable. We need to change the attitudes of people to make them realize that it is our responsibility to conserve for the future. We were given the privilege of living during our time, and the least we can do is take care of our Earth, and pass it on in the same condition we lived in.

The idea of literally depleting the Earth of all of its resources does not seem real to anyone. In actuality, it is inevitable unless we are able to find some alternate means of energy. We have done this in the past, but we cannot expect to continually do it. People need to change their attitudes about conservation and the future, and start making changes. This all starts with the individual.

Eric Kramer Weekly Response 1

Weekly Response 1

Comments by Eric Kramer