Champika Ranawaka’s ‘polythenophobia’ at work: But is Polythene the only culprit?

From August 1 Super Market chains started additionally charging for polythene bags. This is not a government regulation, but a smart move by the retail chains to cut down their operational costs piggybacking on Environment Minster’s  ‘polythenophobia’. If anyone complains retailers can now point to Champika Ranawaka and say ‘See, catch him. He is the bad guy, not us.’

There is a school that argues ban on polythene causes more environmental damage than it prevents, because more trees will fall for paper bags – as the alternative. It is not proved, so for the moment let us assume Polythene is bad and therefore banning is good. Still that is not the issue.

Is Polythene the only pollutant? Aren’t there things that pollute environment more than Polythene?

I can think of at least four.

1. Arial bombing:

There can never be any worse environmental pollutant than a war – and bombing is one of the worst forms. Even without the use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons of ‘Viet Nam war’ types; bombing can make serious long term damages to the environment.  The outcome may be in the form of sea pollution, air pollution, land pollution, ground water contamination, hazardous healthcare waste contamination, damaged sanitation and wastewater infrastructure.

This is what an American research group, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) says in their paper ‘Long-term environmental damage due to NATO bombing in Yugoslavia’:

“As modern warfare becomes more technologically sophisticated and targeting more precise, it is essential not to succumb to the idea that the damage on the ground is also precise and limited. It may be in some cases, but precise bombing does not always yield precise or limited damage. As this study indicates, the health and environmental consequences of precision bombing can affect unborn generations far into the future, even when the bombs are entirely successfully in finding their targets.”

Photographer 'Jadhu' says: I took this photo on my first visit to Sri Lanka since the Norwegian brokered ceasefire took place in 2002. These palm trees all lost their 'heads' due to the artillery shelling that took place between the SL Army and the LTTE. Sad, it's not only these palm trees that lost their lives, this year (2006) alone more than 3,000 people have died due to the proxy war. (www.flickr.com)

2. Fat Government:

On per capita basis, Sri Lanka has probably the fattest governments in Asia. Our public sector has been overgrown beyond its limits solely for expanding vote banks. Having realized the gravity, UNP government of 2001-4 took measures to curtail. Following PA government inflated it again by absorbing 40,000 nearly unemployable graduates for non-existent vacancies. Now we have nearly one million babus working for us the rest 17 million.

To make the matters worse, Sri Lankan government is badly centralized. (In spite of having nominal ‘provincial administrations’) Most processes also remain manual too. This means transporting bus loads and train loads of ‘public servants’ to Colombo. A large section of them still comes from out station. The sheer gusto of having a government job still brings tens of thousands daily from areas as far away as Maho, Mawanella, Kegalle, Ambalangoda, Avissawella and Chilaw. An equal amount of Carbon is released by those who come to serve the business needs of this battalion.

Will private sector absorbing a section of this have less environment effect? May be. Centralisation is not aimed by private sector. It will reduce travel and consequently the concentration of carbon emissions in the capital. A more balanced and distributed development may even solve the problems of urbanization in long term. Given its obvious financial returns private sector, unlike government may also try more telecommuting, as happens in other countries. (In USA 25% of work force work from home)

3. Poor Road/Telecom infrastructure:

Thin two line roads are key to traffic issues. It makes angry drivers wait burning precious oil and emitting Carbon Dioxide to atmosphere. (not to mention road closures for VVIP, VIP and NSIP – Not So Important Person travel) A recent survey has found the average speed of a vehicle on Sri Jayawardenapura SP A1 highway on any weekday is now 9 km per hour fallen from 11 km per hour two years ago.

Developed telecom infrastructure reduces traffic. It makes things happen without individuals having to physically move. In spite of the relative developments in our hard infrastructure, soft infrastructure still fails to cater the needs of public. E-government or m-government services are still virtually unheard in Sri Lanka. A telephone call to a government office leads hardly anywhere. Public are forced to travel, burning precious fuel.

Sadly increasing mobile tax will only make the matters worse as it encourages travel – perceived ‘cheap’ alternative. (For every Rupee we spend on communicating, another 26 cents we pay as tax. With the new environmental levy this is further increased.)

4. Frequent Elections:

Democracy is good, but there is absolutely no need to make every year and election year. Elections can be detrimental to the environment. Even the amount of paper (ballot papers, stationery, posters etc) is ignored, any election releases tons of polythene and non bio degradable digital art paper to the environment. This is loaded with noise pollution. Unfortunately the current PR system forces a candidate to campaign within a larger area, which further adds to environmental damage. The best is not to impose elections at arbitrary times for the survival of the government in power.

Perhaps Minister of Environment knows exactly how bad these pollutants can be. Sadly he will not address any. He may not even agree they are pollutants. They are central to the survival of him and his extremist political party, so admitting them is suicidal.