Comparative Risk - With pollution, there's no easy solution
By Sharon A. Rehder
The following is an article that first appeared in The Conservationist magazine, June, 1997
Remember when we worried that DDT residues caused the eggs of bald eagles to become so fragile they cracked before hatching? Or when we were shocked that an environmental catastrophe such as the Exxon Valdes spill could have such long-lasting impacts on wildlife? Or the growing concern that acid rain from distant sources was poisoning the lakes of the Adirondacks?
These are just a few examples of the impacts of pollution on our environment, on our health and on the quality of our lives. When they are threatened, it is natural to look for easy solutions. Simply prevent the pollution and the problem will resolve itself. But it's not that easy. How do we balance positive needs against negative impacts? We need sources of cheap, reliable energy. But one of the consequences is the production of airborne chemicals that produce acid rain. How can we find a balance between our desire for the products of modern society and the need to protect our health and environment? What are the best ways to prevent pollution?
To tackle those tough questions, DEC has launched the Comparative Risk Project to establish a system for gathering the best information available about risks posed by various chemicals. This is a planning process that identifies, evaluates and compares the risks posed by different environmental problems. That information will be used to formulate pollution prevention strategies that will effectively reduce those risks.
In addition to scientific concerns, comparative risk involves social, cultural, ethical and legal considerations. DEC has invited the participation of representatives from federal, state and local governments, academia, industry, business, and citizen and environmental groups.
The Project steering committee developed a list of 14 chemical categories that pose problems when released into the environment. These include atmospheric gases, metals, organic compounds, nutrients, pesticides and petroleum products. Working groups for the project now are assessing how these categories of pollution impact on the public health and the environment. Also factored in are such social issues as peace of mind, economic well-being, and fairness in the distribution of these impacts.
The Comparative Risk Project, funded through a grant from the federal Environmental Protection Agency, is an evolving process that deals with difficult choices and difficult questions. What do we know about the impacts of the chemicals in our environment? How can we get information to make reasonable choices about our exposure to these chemicals? How can we determine whether one source of pollution is more dangerous to our health or environment than another? At what point does an impact on the quality of life become unacceptable? And finally, how can complex information on risk-based assessment best be shared with people who do not have technical backgrounds?
To address these issues, the Project plans a broad outreach for participation by the public. There will be small-group discussions, newsletters, informational mailings and public meetings. Members of the public will be invited to participate in focus groups, to review or comment on draft documents, and to answer special surveys.
The Project needs to know what you think about sources of environmental risk and what you want DEC to do about them. To join the process or for more information, contact:
Comparative Risk
NYS DEC
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-1750
(518) 402-9469
Sharon A. Rehder is an environmental engineer for the DEC Pollution Prevention Unit in Albany.
Any comments or questions?
Contact us at: 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-1750;
518-402-9469 (phone); 518-402-9168 (fax)
