Discussing the EPA at the American Chemical Society Conference
As one would expect, the banter here at the American Chemical Society conference is largely academic; in the convention center from which I’m writing this post there are more super-smart and extremely specialized people per square foot than I’ve encountered in a long while. But occasionally, I’ll have a conversation with someone that leads in a more humanistic, more philosophic direction.
A 3o-ish gentleman from the EPA just came by the booth, offering us at Doty Windfuels an application for a “Green Chemistry” award. “This concept (using off-peak renewable energy to synthesize carbon-neutral liquid fuels) sounds like a really strong concept; I strongly suggest you apply,” he said. We talked about the overall technological and economic issues at play in synthetic fuels for a few minutes, but I wanted to get his take on something before I let him go. “You must be thrilled with some of the rhetoric coming out of the presidential candidates vis-a-vis the EPA,” I smiled.
“It’s disappointing. We have leaders encouraging voters to abandon science and all the empirical evidence of the environmental dangers that face us. I have a 3-year-old son, and I’m frustrated that we’re irreparably damaging the world in which he’ll grow up, and that we could have a president that would be actively leading the charge.”
“Mine are 16 and 18,” I responded,” and I totally share your feelings. Recently, I began a conversation with a simple apology. I’m trying as hard as the next guy, but I’m sorry that I didn’t get on board sooner, and that I couldn’t do more to turn this around.”
Having said all this, the game’s not over. “It’s half-time for America,” to quote Chrysler’s famous Superbowl ad. As upsetting as all this is, I try to keep in mind that this is a marathon, and that such races require stamina.
