U izvansudskoj nagodbi, kompanije DuPont i Chemours pristale su platite 671 milijuna odštete zbog dugogodišnjeg zagađivanja pitke vode rijeke Ohio, što je uzrokovalo zdravstvene probleme ljudima u okolici. (Ken Silverstein: What Impact Will The DuPont Settlement Have On Corporate Behavior And Economic Progress?, The Forbes, 15. veljače)
Ken Silverstein zanimljivo komentira razlike u pristupu prirodoznanstvenika i pravnika. Iznosi načelnu postavku, da napredak tehnologije ipak, raznim putevima i s puno problema, dovodi do smanjivanje utjecaja na okoliš i zdravlje.
Ovo je u SAD. Postoje odvjetnici, generalno svima mrski, koji ipak mogu natjerati kompanije da plate visoke odštete. Mogli su davno uložiti u tehnološko rješenje postupanja s otpadom, umjesto da ga jednostavno bacaju u rijeku. Ipak, poduzeli su mjete proteklih godina. Otpadne vode industrije izazvale su rast toksičnih algi na tisuću kilometara dugom toku rijeke, stvarajući probleme vodoopskrbnim poduzećima.
U nekim drugim državama, pogotovo u Latinskoj Americi, ekološki i domorodački aktivisti bivaju bacani u zatvor, prebijani pa i ubijani.
DuPont and Chemours Co. are agreeing to pay $671 million in a case involving drinking water contamination that allegedly led to certain cancers. (…)
the industrial revolution brought with it wealth and progress, albeit at a cost to the environment. But as countries and economies grow stronger, they build up their resources to develop newer and more advanced technologies to not just expand further but to also remedy the damages that they have created.
The DuPont case typifies that dynamic (…) it developed a chemical known as C-8 that goes into such products as Teflon and carpet fibers. But it also unloaded the compound into the Ohio River where it borders Ohio and West Virginia, which got into the local drinking water supplies. Citizens there subsequently started to complain of sickness.(…)
Beginning in 2011 and throughout 2012, those independent experts found that C-8 was “more likely than not” to cause such conditions as ulcerative colitis, kidney cancer, thyroid disease and testicular cancer. (…)
What in the heck was DuPont doing dumping a chemical into the Ohio River — for years — without having an alternative mechanism of disposal? It could have incinerated the chemical for a lot less money than what it has settled for, albeit at a greater cost than just emptying the chemical into the river. (…)
Ekološka ekonomija 