Do you restrict business? You restrict business, you lower your standard of living. People don't want to lower the standard of living. Mr. SCHEUER. How do you define the standard of living? Is it just consumption? Is it just the number of automobiles you own or the number of kilowatt-hours of electricity that you consume in electric hair dryers and electric toothbrushes and electric meat carvers? Or isn't it the general satisfaction you enjoy which may be enhanced by a reduction of the goods you consume or maybe a change in the type of goods you consume? Mr. SILFEN. Well, you see, when you get into a field like that, the standard of living, your personal satisfaction, I might need an air conditioner in the summer, I might need one in my car, I might need three cars. Well, you create a demand and companies respond to that demand and you have your own business cycle functioning out of that. But I just get the impression that what's required of us is the change in the national conscience, not the setting up of an environmental utopia run by computers who compute the statistics and help lead us in our decisions, but just an entire change in the way we think. Maybe we have to be a little less greedy, each of us, maybe we can't buy all the fancy clothes we need, and just become a little more aware of what's actually going on with ourselves. You know, how many of us walk down the street and yet we litter unconsciously? I am sure everyone of us bought an ice cream at one time or another and just let the papers go. This is pollution. This breeds rats. Each individual must be made aware of this. Then you come to your political groups, right? Well, when the car show opened there was a demonstration in Central Park and the Black Panthers were there, let's say. They don't care about pollution. They are out for their own gains. Another group might be out for their own gains. They don't care what the Black Panthers want. They want their support, their weight in sheer numbers. But the Black Panthers don't care what the environmental people want, so long as they don't interfere with them. Mr. SCHEUER. Mr. Madigan, let me ask you for some specifics on your last sentences. You said we had to change the behavior of society. Who is going to change it? What are going to be the criteria? How is it going to be effected and what are the specific actions that we can take following that great outpouring of concern 2 days ago that are going to produce identifiable changes in these attitudes? Mr. MADIGAN. I am using the phrase that we've got to change the behavior of society in that I think it is far too prevalent today to say "they" are polluting. To change the behavior of society will require specific educational programs starting in the elementary grades on up. You have to convince the student, whether he is living in Hunts Point or the upper East Side, that it is in his best interests not to throw that can on the street, that it is in his best interests to use biodegradable material, that it is in his best interest to use intelligently the environment. I think, unfortunately, the environment of the classroom is about as far removed from the environment of the home as any two things can be. Our programs seek to bring these two things together. You do certain things in the environment of the home or of the school and you would do certain of them in a Van Cortlandt Park or Wave Hill. We feel that by convincing all individuals, especially the young students, that they are existing as entities within a total environment, that we can bring about the kind of behavioral changes that must be done. When I look at the students some of our teachers are working with that are in the sixth grade now, you realize that in another decade these are the teachers, I take pause. We've got roughly a decade to bring about the kind of educational impact. And I am convinced that if we do not bring about the educational change we will not survive. I don't think we can legislate the kind of change alone without education. Mr. SCHEUER. Education of both the decisionmakers and the consumers of goods and services. Mr. MADIGAN. And the individual consumer of all goods and services, right. Mr. SILFEN. The question is, how do you do it? So you educate all these people, make them aware of problems of pollution. But you still have a fire hazard of a river in Cleveland, and you still have the areas that you have destroyed, the wildlife and beaches destroyed in Santa Barbara, you still have that destroyed. So what this bill is going to help to do, I hope, is that it will finance scientific organizations. You know, people might frown at that, "ha, science," but they are going to give you your solutions because nobody knows what's going on in plant deterioration from ozone, which is what we were studying. Nobody actually knows what goes on. We would examine young plants, old plants, determine their susceptibility, look at exposed plants to light before they were fumigated, then keep them in darkness, then fumigate them. Nobody actually knows what goes on in plants, the actual reactions that destroy tissue. So what has to be done is to finance scientific research into this field to find cures, because Lake Michigan, you know, it will take 500 or 800 years before Lake Michigan is replaced by fresh water. Mr. SCHEUER. We don't need a lot of research on Lake Michigan. We know what's wrong there. Mr. SILFEN. Not what's wrong, but how to drain it and get it out. Mr. SCHEUER. I will ask you a problem as a scientist. To make Lake Michigan clean, if you had the control, could you make the decision tomorrow that would bring Lake Michigan back in a quarter of a century? Would it be lack of knowledge? Mr. PELIKAN. I think so. At least the way my education has progressed in the present system, if you want to know anything about pollution, you have to do it on your own. You have to spend a Monday afternoon from 4 to 8 o'clock at Wave Hill rather than taking that as an offered course or required course in place of something else. Air pollution is an interdiscipline. Air pollution needs a study of economics as well as biochemistry and it needs a study of all sorts of political angles, none of which have been integrated for me. I have learned history, biology, chemistry. But if I want to know anything about air pollution or water pollution, I have to do it on my own. And I think this bill would provide more of a merging together of different disciplines for the study and in that way maybe in 10 years scientists will have been educated to the solution of our environmental problems from first grade rather than from graduate school where they maybe find material for it. Mr. MADIGAN. That's it precisely. Mr. SCHEUER. Not first grade; preschool. Mr. MADIGAN. That's why I am in favor of this bill, and for a lot of selfish reasons, too. We do have preservice, training, and pilot programs we are ready to start immediately, providing we can get the funding to do it. The foundation money that's been supporting us is primarily pilot money. We have the models set up. We can start them in the Bronx. They can be easily replicated elsewhere. Mr. SCHEUER. In the meantime, before this bill gets passed-and it may be several months before it is passed-maybe we can apply for some moneys under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. under title III. Mr. MADIGAN. I can be in touch with your staff about that. Gentlemen, I can't thank you enough for coming here. I am really in your debt, not only for your very stimulating testimony today, but for the great, great experience, the only thing I can call it, that you provided me yesterday. We are indebted to you for your concepts. Mr. MADIGAN. Thank you, Congressmen. Mr. SCHEUER. We will now invite our four friends. Will you come up here, identify yourselves by name? And we will take 10 minutes before lunch to hear your views on this bill. All right. Let's start from left to right. Each of you identify yourself. Mr. MAGEOR. David Mageor, Stuyvesant High School. Mr. GILLER. Evan Giller. Mr. NADEL. Steve Nadel, Stuyvesant. Mr. GEFFNER. Paul Geffner. Mr. BASS. Steven Bass, Stuyvesant. Mr. ARNO. Peter Arno. Mr. SCHWEITZER. Mark Schweitzer. Mr. SCHEUER. Very good. There are seven of you. Do you each want to speak for a minute and a half? Mr. SCHWEITZER. We didn't come prepared to speak. Mr. SCHEUER. I know you didn't. You are obviously young people concerned, you have put in legwork, sweat, equity. I would like to hear you sound off. 47-238-70- -36 STATEMENTS OF DAVID MAGEOR, EVAN GILLER, STEVE NADEL, PAUL GEFFNER, STEVEN BASS, PETER ARNO, AND MARK SCHWEITZER, STUDENTS AT STUYVESANT HIGH SCHOOL Mr. SCHWEITZER. One of the first things I would like to answer, you asked the question a number of times; Who dropped the paper plates? I heard sanitation cleaned up 8,000 tons after Earth Day. Mr. SCHEUER. Citywide? Mr. MAGEOR. 14th Street. Mr. SCHEUER. I think at 14th Street they had quite a problem on that day, and Fifth Avenue. It's very interesting that you saw a little bit of hope for the future. Let me ask a question. One or two of you can answer. What do you think we ought to do as a followup to Earth Day in our society to put meat on that skeleton and make it very real? Mr. ARNO. You are talking about education all morning long on what is being done and we wrote a high school curriculum for relating environmental problems to physical sciences, biology, physics, social sciences, English, math, art. We distributed these. Mr. SCHEUER. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. SCHEUER. The students did this themselves? Mr. ARNO. Steve Nadel and I did in conjunction. Mr. SCHEUER. There being no objection, I will ask that this report be inserted in full in the record at this point. (The report referred to follows:) HIGH SCHOOL ECOLOGY RELATED CURRICULUM: TO BE USED IN ALL SUBJECT AREAS ON APRIL 20 IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE "EARTH DAY" TEACH-IN The state of the environment concerns and affects all. On April 22nd and in the days and weeks following, a nationwide effort will be made to make the public aware of the gravity of our present environmental situation. As teachers, you and your colleagues enjoy a unique position. You have the capability of reaching the vast number of students across the country who will inherit this polluted world unless something is done. Please examine this suggested curriculum carefully. If you have any questions or suggestions, please contact us. The Time for Action Is Now! STUDENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. CLASSROOM PROJECTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS FOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS (A) Biology I. PHYSICAL SCIENCES (1) What is ecology? Explain the balance of ecosystems, food chains and life cycles. (2) Population: Is overcrowding a major cause of crime, disease, and drug addiction? Study of different theories: Malthus, Sadler, Doubleday, Godwin, Marx-what are the natural mechanisms of population control? (3) Pesticides: Pesticide content in foods-do pesticides always yield higher food production? (4) What is eutrophication? How can it be reversed? Compare a eutrophic lake with an oligotrophic lake. Oligotrophic lake-many species, few individuals. Eutrophic lake few species, many individuals. (5) What are the benefits of bio-degradable goods? (6) What is in our foods? (Food additives and preservatives) (B) Physics (1) Energy consumption: Is there such a thing as clean energy? What are the waste problems involved whenever man produces energy? (2) What is the potential of nuclear power? Can it replace convention fuel sources as a pollution free energy form? What about thermal pollution? Radioactive wastes? (3) What are the prospects of solar power? Tidal power? (4) Noise pollution: Have danger levels been reached? What has to be sacrificed in order to curb noise, (SST, new airports, machinery, etc.)? What can be done? (C) Chemistry (1) Air Pollution-Smog: What are the pollutants in our air? What are the photochemical reactions that produce smog? What are the effects of pollutants on: health, weather, and the composition of the atmosphere? (2) Internal Combustion Engine: Why and how does it pollute? What are the poilutants? What are their effects? (3) Discussion: Can we afford to have 100 million internal combustion engines? Should we replace the internal combustion engine with the electric or steam car? What about improved mass transit? II. SOCIAL SCIENCES (1) Set up debates: Can there be infinite growth in a finite world? Does capitalism breed exploitation of natural resources? Is population control too late? Should we outlaw the internal combustion engine? Does overcrowding lead to crime, disease, or war? What is the future of the city? (2) Explore legislative approaches to a cleaner environment: What is being done? What bills are currently before legislature? What has been the effectiveness of past laws? III. ENGLISH (1) Effective education on our environmental crisis: Media, schools. (2) Read works by naturalists such as Thoreau and Frost. (3) Set up debates: Need we dismantle our technological society in order to end pollution? How does our society train people to be polluters? Must man change his life style to save his environment? (4) Write poems and essays on environmental problems. IV. MATH (1) Provide illustrations of geometric progression vs. arithmetic progression. Illustrate Malthusian principles. (2) Explain population curve. (3) Calculate surface area of earth. Compare area taken up by human beings to area taken up by autos, highways, garages, etc. Calculate for now. In 100 years. V. ART (1) Make collages showing contrast between a clean and polluted environment. (2) Have a poster, button, or cartoon contest. (3) Have a sculpture exhibit on pollution. If you have not already planned projects for your classes we hope the above suggestions will be of service to you. BIBLIOGRAPHY GENERAL De Bell, Garrett, "The Environmental Handbook," Ballantine, N.Y., 1970. |