Kruse Kronicle

Why I Left Greenpeace

—

by

mwkruse
in

Wall Street Journal: Why I Left Greenpeace. (Mr. Moore, co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace is chairman and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies.)

In 1971 an environmental and antiwar ethic was taking root in Canada, and I chose to participate. As I completed a Ph.D. in ecology, I combined my science background with the strong media skills of my colleagues. In keeping with our pacifist views, we started Greenpeace.

But I later learned that the environmental movement is not always guided by science. As we celebrate Earth Day today, this is a good lesson to keep in mind.

At first, many of the causes we championed, such as opposition to nuclear testing and protection of whales, stemmed from our scientific knowledge of nuclear physics and marine biology. But after six years as one of five directors of Greenpeace International, I observed that none of my fellow directors had any formal science education. They were either political activists or environmental entrepreneurs. Ultimately, a trend toward abandoning scientific objectivity in favor of political agendas forced me to leave Greenpeace in 1986.

The breaking point was a Greenpeace decision to support a world-wide ban on chlorine. Science shows that adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health, virtually eradicating water-borne diseases such as cholera. And the majority of our pharmaceuticals are based on chlorine chemistry. Simply put, chlorine is essential for our health. …

Comments

5 responses to “Why I Left Greenpeace”

  1. Peggy Avatar
    Peggy

    However … chlorine that is not allowed to dissipate from our drinking water before we drink it kills our “good bacteria”. And chlorine vapor in hot showers, jacuzzis, etc. can damage the respiratory system. Some people are sensitive or allergic — and going to an indoor swimming pool can be awful.
    This is yet another example of something good that can also be something harmful, if we don’t follow the path all the way to the end.
    So, I filter my water at the tap and in the shower…makes a tremendous difference. And there are pools that use other chemicals to keep the water pure….
    By all means, we need to have scientists involved. But we also need a more diverse group of scientists than is usually present.

    Reply
  2. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    I think level of economic development has to be a factor. Chlorine as an improvement to the water system in Niger may have heatlh benefits far beyond any of the negative side effect you mentioned (like jacuzzis.) Developed nations with more advanced technologies may be able to adopt other startegies. As with so many of these issues, the issue isn’t “right or wrong,” but rather trade-offs in a particular context.
    “But we also need a more diverse group of scientists than is usually present.”
    No. We just need more of the ones that agree with me. 😉

    Reply
  3. Peggy Avatar
    Peggy

    Absolutely! You have to weigh the benefits from the detriments — like the whole DDT and malaria eradication scenario. :^(
    It’s when folks want to make sweeping generalizations for all circumstances that I start to push back — like Mr. Moore did.
    “We just need more of the ones that agree with me. ;)” Hehehe….
    …BTW, I’ve been waiting for you to enter the frey over at Jesus Creed with our new commentor, “Ron”….

    Reply
  4. Rob Avatar
    Rob

    It reminds me of the petitions that have gone around for banning Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO). This DHMO is a chemical that is used in paint manufacturing and other heavy industries. But it’s in all our rivers and lakes, and they’ve even found it in baby food. Statistics show that it kills over 3,000 people / yr in the US alone. Sadly, many of them are children killed by DHMO suffication.
    Punch line: it’s more commonly known as H2O or water. DHMO.com is a website that makes it sound even scarier. Nothing untrue on the website, just taken WAY out of context. Again, it’s a matter of weighing the benefits with the dangers.
    Which reminds me of my early years when my grandmother gave me a hard time for drinking Coke.
    “‘They’ put a rusty nail in a glass of Coke and in 3 days the rust was gone!” she’d warn.
    I’d tell her that “they” also put a regular nail in a glass of water, and within 3 days it was covered with rust.
    “If that’s what water does to something as hard as a nail, imagine what it does to your stomach!” To this day, I won’t touch the stuff. 🙂

    Reply
  5. Michael W. Kruse Avatar
    Michael W. Kruse

    Peggy, I’m on the road and simply unable to devote much time at the moment. Otherwise I would love to chime in but as it is I think poor Ron is feeling a bit out numbered. 🙂
    Rob, I love the DHMO example. I didn’t realize there was a website for it.
    Another story my dad tells (a chemist) is the chemistry prof who put a beaker of water and a beaker whiskey on the table in front of the class. He dropped a worm in each beaker. The worm in the water swam around. The one in the whiskey shriveled up and died. The prof asked, “So what does this teach you about whiskey?” To which a student replied, “If you drink whiskey, you won’t have worms?” 🙂

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Michael W. KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading