RSS
Benjamin Hale has a chapter published in the new book Consequentialism and Environmental Ethics by Avram Hiller, Ramona Ilea, and Leonard Kahn, Eds. (December 2013, Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory).
Excerpt: Of the 4.9 million barrels of crude oil discharged into the Gulf of Mexico during and immediately after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, an impressive 41% of the oil was removed through human intervention. Such interventions included not only chemical dispersion {accounting for approximately 16% of the discharge), in situ burning {5%), and skimming (3%), but also a significant portion was captured directly from the well {17%). Researchers estimate that another 37% of the oil disappeared naturally, either through natural dispersion (13%) or through evaporation or dissolution {24%). As the remaining 22% of the oil continues to float in the gulf and threaten wildlife, the cost of the cleanup is expected to pass $41 billion (Hagerty and Ramseur 2010).
Notwithstanding these economic costs, many lives, human and non-human, have been affected by the spill. Countless sea critters, including fish and marine mammals, died gruesome deaths or ended up with genetically abnormal offspring. Fish, shrimp, and oyster stocks were decimated (in the literal sense of the term). More than 3,000 miles of beach and wetland areas were bathed in oil. Recreation in the area took an incredible hit. The devastation is tremendous, and those responsible for the event-British oil giant BP, primarily-are on the hook to clean it all up.
Many people want to say this: that pollution is wrong. Typically, they say this on harm grounds: Pollution is wrong because it is harmful to other people, to animals, or to nature more generally. This seems about right. Environmental damage is a serious consequence of polluting and it would seem wrong to impose it unjustifiably. These same people may have similar views about elephant poaching and rampant suburban expansion, to take just two examples, though such cases are not instances of pollution. That is, they may think that what makes poaching and rampant expansion wrong is also that it destroys the environment. In this way, pollution is just one of several forms of environmental wronging. Read more …
