re: Industry environmental initiative waning?

[Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot <ksrosselot@processprofiles.com>]

Waning is the word.  My take:

When Bush became president, I thought it might be good for p2 
in a backdoor sort of way because when Daddy Bush was in 
office, there was a flurry of win-win cooperative voluntary 
p2 projects with big industry.  Perhaps a cynic would say the 
real purpose of those projects was to support the notion that 
regulations are actually keeping industry from being clean 
and if industry was less regulated, it would be good for the 
environment.  Whatever the case, these projects were good for 
p2 and good for the environment.

Also there tends to be more support in terms of donations 
from individuals for environmental NGOs such as NRDC and 
Environmental Defense and INFORM when we have a 
administration which is perceived to be anti-environmental, 
and such donations are good for p2.

However, 9/11 changed any possible potential positive focus 
the current administration might ever have had on the 
environment, and victims of the attacks became the focus of 
individual donations.  The NGOs have been very busy fighting 
legal fires over the environmental steps that have been taken 
by the current administration, and it's taken their attention 
away from proactive projects.

-Kirsten

---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:49:11 -0600
>From: David Inman <dinman@norbic.org>  
>Subject: re: Industry environmental initiative waning?  
>To: Todd MacFadden <Todd_MacFadden@uml.edu>, <NPPR@great-
lakes.net>, <P2Tech@great-lakes.net>
>
>You bet. The middle of the NYTimes article has this phrase:
>
>"...voluntary pollution-control programs are most likely to 
arise when industry feels threatened by stronger regulation. 
Conversely, such programs can stagnate or wither whenever 
government pressure weakens."  That correlates completely 
with the ebb and flow of clients I've added for P2 projects 
over the past 5+ years.
>
>My biggest influx of clients? A couple of Decembers ago when 
the Chlorinated Solvent NESHAP went into effect. 
>
>My biggest environmental hit? One of those same clients who 
went from emitting 21 tons of perc per year to zero. Realized 
he could make do with soap and water without any ill effect 
on his product or to his customers. 
>
>My biggest enemy? The equipment manufacturer who was just 
about to sell him a brand spankin' new degreaser with an 
enhanced condenser and bigger freeboard that (carefully 
calculated, I'm sure) would have edged him just under 10 tpy 
of emissions. 
>
>None of this happens without the regulation and a compliance 
inquiry letter from IL EPA.
>
>Amazing how people will begin to think outside the box, 
after you've put them in one.
>
>David R. Inman - Director
>NORBIC Environmental + Energy Assistance Center
>Chicago
>www.norbic.org
> 
>
> 
>
>
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
* * * * *
>nppr is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
>http://www.great-lakes.net
>To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-
lakes.net
>with the command 'unsubscribe nppr' in the body of your 
message. No
>quotes or subject line are required.
>About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/nppr/nppr.info
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
* * * * *
===============================
Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, P.E.
Process Profiles
P.O. Box 8264
Calabasas, CA 91372-8264

ksrosselot@processprofiles.com
http://www.processprofiles.com

(818) 878-0454
===============================

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
nppr is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network:
http://www.great-lakes.net
To unsubscribe from this list: send mail to majordomo@great-lakes.net
with the command 'unsubscribe nppr' in the body of your message. No
quotes or subject line are required.
About : http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/nppr/nppr.info
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *