OPINION/COMMENTARY

Energy Conservation Zealots 1, Consumers 0

On Jan. 13, a federal appeals court overturned a Bush administration rule that would increase energy efficiency standards for central air conditioners and heat pumps by 20 percent. The court ordered that the Bush rule be replaced by a proposal from the Clinton administration that would require a 30 percent increase in energy efficiency. Environmentalists and energy conservation obsessives declared it "a big victory for consumers." They also declared that up is down, black is white, night is day, and that pigs really do fly.

Well, actually they didn't. But they might as well have.

You don't have to be some whiz-bang economist or regulatory specialist to laugh-off the claim that consumers "won" when the court decided as it did. All you need is a moment of reflection. Energy efficiency standards, after all, remove products from the marketplace that are deemed "energy inefficient." Accordingly, supporters of the decision are literally arguing that it's "a big victory for consumers" when the federal government prevents consumers from buying products they might otherwise wish to buy -- and indeed have bought -- for their entire lives. Only in Washington can denying consumers choices in the marketplace be deemed "pro-consumer."....

The Environmental Working Group: Peddlers of Fear

What is the EWG? In reporting the salmon study, the New York Times described the group as “a non-profit environmental research and advocacy organization financed by private donations.” For Reuters, EWG was a “a nonprofit organization that investigates environmental issues.” The Wall Street Journal described the group as a “nonprofit research organization,” and the Washington Post merely stated that EWG was “an advocacy organization.” Such modest descriptions of the organization do a great disservice both to the reading public and to Environmental Working Group.

Shortly after EWG’s salmon study was released, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) contacted the National Cancer Institute and posed a simple but highly relevant question: “Do you know of any evidence that human exposure to trace elements of PCBs in fish contributes to the toll of human cancer?” the group asked. According to ACSH’s president, Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan, writing in the August 15, 2003 issue of the Washington Times, the National Cancer Institute’s answer was a resounding “no.” Dr. Whelan went on to point out that conspicuously absent from EWG’s Web site is any reference to scientific credentials or any other information about those who undertook the salmon study.

“This omission,” she pointed out, “is consistent with the fact that the EWG president once conceded to the Weekly Standard that the Environmental Working Group does not have a single doctor or scientist on staff.”....

Eco-imperialism: Green Power; Black Death

At recent events in Washington and New York a broad charge of eco-imperialism has been laid at the feet of the environmental movement. Government officials, aid agency bureaucrats, as well as sandal-wearing greens, are blamed for mass disease and death in the poorest countries of the world because they export their most vile regulatory policies. So far, the green movement has largely ignored the criticism, but it is slowly having to respond, since "eco-imperialism" is becoming a more widely heard, if not yet fully appreciated, term.

The most obvious example of eco-imperialism has been the push to restrict the use of the insecticide, DDT, for controlling mosquito-borne diseases. Concerns about damage to egg shells of birds of prey (probably caused by massive agricultural DDT use), have pushed the greens to demand DDT restrictions, which have cost tens of millions of lives over the past few decades. But in addition to this pinnacle of eco-imperialism, other examples have emerged. At the George C. Marshall Institute event in Washington DC last month, Indian economist, Prasanna Srinivasan discussed the pesticide Paraquat. He documented how the greens have tried to ban its use and unfortunately, they have succeeded in several places.

According to Greenpeace co-founder, Patrick Moore, "The environmental movement has lost its objectivity, morality and humanity." Speaking at an event this week in New York City, organized by the Congress on Racial Equality, Dr. Moore, concluded that: "The pain and suffering it inflicts on families in developing countries can no longer be tolerated."....