[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: P2 and National Security

I think your biggest point is the reduction in toxic chemicals means less stuff around for mischief.  Shortly after 9.11 a series of suspected terrorist were discovered getting hazardous waste transport permits.  Clearly hazardous chemicals are seen as a weapon by some.

Tomas Vinson

Fax: 512/239-3165
Phone: 512/239-3182

Engineering Specialist
TNRCC - Pollution Prevention
PO Box 13087
Austin, Tx 78711-3087

>>> "Burton Hamner" <bhamner@cleanerproduction.com> 12/06/01 07:06PM >>>
Hello all.  I am doing some thinking about Pollution Prevention and national security at request of a colleague and also for a workshop in March.  Is there an obvious connection?  Or some more subtle ones?  Here are some of my thoughts:

- Toxics reduction:  P2 can mean fewer toxic chemicals around for people to make trouble with.

- Minimum requirements for resources:  P2 can reduce the amount of water and energy that people need to get by, so they are less vulnerable perhaps in event of disruption of supply.  Reducing use also makes distributed generation of power and clean water more feasible so systems have fewer vulnerable points.

- Carbohydrate chemistry and chemical substitutions and reduction can reduce the need for imported oil (tho this is hardly likely to make any difference).

Does anyone have other ideas to share?  It may be that this is all just reaching a little too far for relevance to national security.  But that's what listservs are for - reaching way far!

Burt Hamner