A Reader Responds to 'America's Other Trade Deficit'

Dear ENN:

In a recently published commentary by Robert Ovetz, PhD entitled "America's Other Trade Deficit" the author points out some very poignant issues relating to America's exporting environmental problems. There is no doubt that we import a large quantity of materials from countries that have little or no environmental regulation. If Dr. Ovetz stopped there I would have to agree with him. As a country, we continue to pollute by proxy via exports of obsolete electronics and imports of endangered woods and by purchasing items manufactured in a vacuum of environmental law from countries like China and to a lesser extent, India.

Unfortunately Dr. Ovetz then goes off on a tirade against the plastics industry for exposing a generation to "Malthusian consequences for human development." He claims that American industry is somehow swarming through Brussels trying to influence the common market and that "Equally as toxic is the myth that plastics can be recycled" (they can only be reused).

I thought that by definition "recycling" is reuse of a material. Maybe Dr. Ovetz and I have different interpretations of the word. The facilities that I administer, (10, located in three countries and four states), all recycle a large variety of items ranging from wood pallets to -- yes, you guessed it -- plastic. In fact we recycle almost 100% of our plastic because we are paid for it by recyclers.

I find Dr. Ovetz's editorial long on alarmism and short on hard science. In industry we find a way to recycle materials because waste affects the bottom line, not only in materials acquisition, but also in disposal costs and adverse effects on the environment.

Mike Johnston, Senior Environmental Engineer, Trim Masters, Inc.

Reprinted with permission.