January 15, 1975

Luddites Are Alive And Well

The Luddites are alive and well and working at the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Luddites, you will remember, were organized bands of English rioters who felt threatened by advancing technology and so began invading the new textile factories about 1811 and breaking up the machinery.

Arch Booth, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, feels the Environmental Protection Agency wants to turn back the clock.

He says EPA's regional office has been distributing an expensive, four-color, three-fold pamphlet -"The Time Has Come" - urging us to repent our materialism before it's too late.

Three themes intertwine in a disorganized way throughout this publication:

1. We're running out of raw materials ("resources").
2. We're running out of energy .sources.
3. We'd be happier sacrificing our high material standard of living "to maximize the quality of life," whatever that means.

Both views these approaches to our very real environmental problems with some alarm.  The whole subject is complicated and fraught with emotion.  Yet the Chamber executive speaks provocatively.

The EPA pamphlet has some serious internal contradictions, he contends.  "At one point, for example, we are told that it takes "enormous time ("40 to 60 years") to introduce new energy technologies.

"At another point, we are warned not to count on the development of new energy sources.  In other words, it takes too long to develop the new energy sources that we are not going to find.  "Surely there is someone on the EPA staff who is aware that our present energy sources are good for at least 40 to 60 years.

"And yes, I fearlessly predict that we will develop the necessary new energy technologies.  The potential of solar power and fusion power is virtually limitless, and we are easily with 40 years of making both practical.  That's a very good thing, because as EPA should know, it takes a great deal of energy to clean up pollution (and, for that matter, to produce fancy pamphlets telling us we are wasting resources).

"As far as running out of other raw materials is concerned, we will run out of some, and recycle the rest.  Given enough energy, we will eventually be able to make just about anything we need from whatever raw material is available.  Human ingenuity is not a finite resource.

"The EPA pamphlet implies that we should shift from an energy-intensive to a labor-intensive economy.  That implication suggests a dangerous level of economic ignorance of EPA, the more so since they chose to defend the work rather than retract it when the Illinois Manufacturer's Association complained.

"If you would like a good example of a labor-intensive economy, take a look at India.  Our free time, our ability to support cultural institutions, our medical science - all are products of an energy-intensive economy, not alternatives to it.

"As Interior Secretary Rogers Morton said last August, "The main trouble with Zero growth argument is that it flies in the face of human nature.  Man isn't built to vegetate of stagnate.  We like to progress."

"There is general agreement that we must take some steps to guard ourselves against the dangers of pollution.  But what and how much to do are highly controversial issues.  I respect 'the right of any private citizen to express his views on the matter.  But I question the desirability of allowing a government agency to use tax money to glorify its own misconceptions.

"When Congress established the U.S. Information Agency to distribute abroad information about this country, it wisely provided that "any such information ... shall not be disseminated within the U.S." The congressmen were properly frightened at the prospect of establishing an official government propaganda ministry to convince the citizens that Big Brother is always right.

"It's time to apply that precedent to the regulatory agencies as well."

Personally, I cannot agree wholly either with the EPA or Booth.  We need to do something about our environmental problems, and we need to do it with caution and common sense.  How well we balance these needs may be the difference between success and annihilation.

Moderation is the only safe approach at this time.  The EPAers are two new in this field of activity to be trusted fully.  Frequently their hasty solutions do more harm than good - the catalytic auto exhaust converter being a good example.

At the same time, it is too late for business as usual.  We cannot any longer use our natural resources as if there was no tomorrow.

Somewhere between the Luddities of yesteryear and the Capitalists of today there is a position of reason.

Author: Lindsey Williams