Hey Burt, I agree that reducing toxics and other hazardous materials is probably one of the biggest advantages to reconcile P2 with security issues. Along with reducing the materials is knowing what you have. Maintaining an inventory of your hazardous materials is another way of being proactive in maintaining good security. The Anarchists Cookbook provides a checklist for raids on high school labs; one of the reasons this is suggested, is that school labs don't know what they have. An active inventory can provide some advance that something may be amiss.
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!