The economy says you have got to use more and throw it away so that we can make some more to sell you. How do we balance those two things? Mr. BUZZELLI. Can I take a crack at that? Because I think there is a common myth that in an industry such as mine that conservation works negatively against our industry. In fact, we have got many, many examples of where it doesn't. A few years ago we got into developing recycled plastic resins, and I can remember the first time that it was suggested there was at least a few folks said, "Why would I want to get into recycled plastic resin because that will reduce our resin sales, our plastics for Dow?" In fact, today we have a full line of recycled products in our plastics business and those plastics have value to our customers. They demand them and they are willing to pay for them. And what's happening, in an industry like ours, and the chemical industry is really an enabling industry for other companies, like theirs and others, the fact is that the paradigm of growth in our industry, economic development in our industry is changed. It is no longer more pounds are better next year than this year. That isn't where the growth has to come from. The growth has to come from new services and new types of products where environmental opportunities exist. We have a couple of examples today where we are renting chemicals, if I can use that term, instead of selling them, where we-a customer of ours buys a product, we take it back, reconstitute it and sell it again. They are willing to pay us for that service. It's less pounds of material that we are ultimately selling. But the fact is the returns and the profitability are there. The real key in my mind is to get some of the industries like the chemical industry and heavy manufacturers to begin to focus on environmental opportunity instead of always thinking of the environment as a major problem. The fact is there is a terrific amount of opportunity in the environment because in the end it's the consumer and the consumer pull-through, whether it's a pull through Mr. Imhoff's industry and then that pulls through mine or not. Solving it is not all negative. In fact, there are some big positives in this game. Mr. BARTLETT. But you can only sell more plastic if somebody else is using more plastic. Mr. BUZZELLI. Well, but we are selling less in many cases because people are reusing it, and that doesn't bother us because we can get into the loop of providing that service of recycling plastic. Mr. BARTLETT. Okay. So the recycling compensates for the less plastic that is sold. Mr. BUZZELLI. We are going to become far more of a—in the future, far more than a supplier of pounds, it will be viewed more as a supplier of services to a customer. Mr. BARTLETT. The last thing I would like to just mention and that is I am a farmer. I have lived on a farm all my life. The farmer is now being blamed for nonpoint source pollution. And I will tell you there is no farmer I know that wants his pesticide to show up in the Chesapeake Bay. And he doesn't want his fertilizer to show up in the Chesapeake Bay. He wants the crop to use all of the fertilizer and he wants the pesticides, every bit of it, to kill bugs. And what the farmer really needs is better techniques. And, if we are going to provide a service to the farmer, it's not penalizing him for growing food and fiber as economically as he grows it, and we do the best job in the world in this country. What we need to do is to show the farmer how to use fertilizer so it doesn't end up in the bay, and how to use insecticides, if in fact he needs to use either one. And I happen to be a proponent of organic farming and I just think that that can grow. Whether it can ever totally replace the other, I am not sure. But to the extent it grows, we are lessening pollution and I think that's great. Well, again I want to commend you for being an excellent panel. As I said before, when I started I've listened to no other panel that wanted so small a place at the public trough. Congratulations! Mr. VALENTINE. Well, I thank the distinguished gentleman for that observation and for many others. He's a very valuable member of this subcommittee. I mean that sincerely. Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you, sir. Mr. VALENTINE. And I would also like to remind the gentleman that it was the wonderful staff that we have here that selected these people to come and testify. And with that I would like to say for the record that our colleague Mr. Grams request permission to submit questions to witnesses. Without objection, so ordered. And there may be other Members who will want to submit questions. If that doesn't become an impossible burden, we would appreciate it if you would respond. And let me for all the members of the subcommittee thank you again for your appearance here. It's been very, very helpful. With that the subcommittee stands adjourned. [Whereupon, at 12:42 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.] APPENDIX Testimony of David H. Marks James Mason Crafts Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering To the US House of Representatives The Environmental Technologies Act of 1993 10:30 am to 12:30 PM Rayburn House Office Building November 18, 1993 I am pleased to have this opportunity to address the Subcommittee on the National Initiatives in Green Technologies-Legislative Proposals. At MIT, I am an educator of two different types of students: Those who are preparing for careers as environmental professionals and those whose professional decisions in technology, management and policy will have a great impact on the environment. We have done a good job of educating the former (about 5% of MIT students) for over 100 years. We are just now learning and experimenting with new curricula, subjects, modules, internships in industry and new methods of analysis to educate the other 95%. This is a critical transition as future sustainable development will depend on the knowledge, experiences, methods and attitudes of all our graduates. It is important that the educational portion of the proposed legislation learn from some of the difficulties introduced in this transition such as disciplinary boundary barriers, the lack of critical interdisciplinary research and the lack of awareness of the need for students to understand the social, economic and political context of their technologic and scientific studies. I would like to respond to the questions put to me by the Subcommittee as follows: 1 (335) 1) How is MIT attempting to educate its scientists and engineers generally about integrating environmental sustainability into their analysis? The important prerequisite was to form an interdisciplinary faculty group interested in integration and development in this area. The purpose of such a group is to insure cooperation across disciplinary boundaries. PEEER (the MIT Program for Environmental Engineering Education and Research) is a "virtual" program. Faculty from different disciplines belong voluntarily drawn by the intellectual challenge and their desires to improve our performance in this area. Together they have helped to build exciting new programs such as: a. Programs for Environmental Professionals A new undergraduate degree program in Environmental Engineering Science administered by Civil and Environmental Engineering announces the start of a whole new discipline. The program presently has about 5% of MIT's undergraduates enrolled. The provision of six subject Minor Programs in Environmental Engineering Science for Students in other Engineering, Science, Planning, Management and Humanities students. Preeminent Professional and Research Oriented Graduate Programs in every aspect of Environmental Engineering Science. b. Programs for Other Professionals to help them increase their knowledge of how decisions about material selection, technologic process, product use and design and recycling impact sustainable development New undergraduate and graduate literacy subjects that require few prerequisites have been established. An example has been an award winning series in Chemicals in the |