History of Modern American Science and Technology Session 年夏

Presentation on theme: "History of Modern American Science and Technology Session 年夏"— Presentation transcript:

1 History of Modern American Science and Technology Session 4 2011年夏
Modern Environmental Movement

2 Rachel Carson, Marine biologist (MS from Johns Hopkins) and nature writer Career in Fish and Wildlife Service, US federal government, Wrote popular books on the ocean, most famously The Sea around US (1952) Wrote Silent Spring ( ) which has been called one of the few books that changed world history; it started the modern environmental movement

3 Silent Spring (1962) Modern problem: “Only within the moment of time represented by the present century has one species—man—acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world.” Scale of the problem: “Along with the possibility of the extinction of mankind by nuclear war, the central problem of our age has therefore become the contamination of man’s total environment with such substances of incredible potentials for harm.”

4 Silent Spring (cont.) Danger unknown: “It is not my contention that chemical insecticides must never be used. I do contend that we have put poisonous and biologically potent chemicals indiscriminately into the hands of persons largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials for harm.” Public’s right to know: “The public must decide whether it wishes to continue on the present road, and it can do so only when in full possession of the facts.”

5 Silent Spring (cont.) Need for scientific research: “All of these questions urgently require the precise answers that only extensive research can provide, yet funds for such purposes are pitifully small….When will the public become sufficiently aware of the facts to demand such action?”

6 Silent Spring (cont.) Importance of scientific research: “A truly extraordinary variety of alternatives to the chemical control of insects is available. Some are already in use and have achieved brilliant success. Others are in the stage of laboratory testing. Still others are little more than ideas in the minds imaginative scientists, waiting for the opportunity to put them to test.”

7 Important to understand nature: “All [alternative to chemicals] have these in common: they are biological solutions, based on understanding of the mechanisms they seek to control, and of the whole fabric of life to which these organisms belong.”

8 Silent Spring (cont.) Science and technology: “The ‘control of nature’ is a phrase conceived in arrogance, born of the Neanderthal age of biology and philosophy, when it was supposed that nature exists for the convenience of man. The concepts and practices of applied entomology for the most part date from that Stone Age of science.” “It is our alarming misfortune that so primitive a science has armed itself with the most modern and terrible weapons, and that in turning them against the insects it has also turned them against the earth.”

9 President’s Science Advisory Committee
First constituted in the Executive Office of the President in the aftermath of the Korean War in 1951 Reconstitute into the White House in 1957 when Eisenhower sought to respond to the Sputnik crisis PSAC helped Eisenhower organize space program, initiate nuclear test ban, and evaluate military technology

10 Eisenhower on PSAC White House, December 1960:
The President said that he had a deep sense of obligation to PSAC. He has put science advice into more and more subjects of national policy. PSAC holds great influence in our federal system. Personal gratification; “most impressive” and “valuable” work; “stimulation of thought”; “broadening and deepening of understanding.” Said later: His science “wizards” helped him control the arms and space races.

11 PSAC and Technological Skepticism
PSAC’s importance: Not their advice on what technology could do, but on what it could not do. Technological skepticism: PSAC recognized the limits of what a given technology could accomplish in the broad social and political environment and advocated instead basic scientific research as a precondition for any technological solution. It manifested itself most clearly in PSAC’s evaluation of military technology, space program, nuclear arms control, and its report on “Uses of Pesticides” in response to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in the 1963.

12 PSAC, Kennedy, and Silent Spring
USDA, chemical companies and pest control scientists attacked Carson for exaggerating the harms of pesticides: “damage control”; “The main problem is Miss Carson.” Kennedy and PSAC were sympathetic to Carson’s concern Kennedy press conference in August 1962: federal government to respond to Silent Spring, specifically Federal Council for Science and Technology and PSAC

13 PSAC as Environmental Experts
Cranberry crisis of 1959 Jerome Wiesner: Presidential science advisor, PSAC chairman, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology, chairman of the Federal Council for Science and Technology Wiesner came from MIT and helped Kennedy to end nuclear test in the air; later visited China in 1970s PSAC on cranberry crisis of 1959; radiation debate; new field, no experts

14 PSAC Panel on Life Science
Colin M. MacLeod, a pioneer in molecular biology at New York University was chairman. Panel included prominent scientists, such as James Watson of Harvard. Critics charged that they were not experts on pest control, but that’s not their job There was no experts on the environmental effects of pesticides MacLeod: “the magnitude of this problem is going to require a distinct reorientation on the part of many.”

15 Carson meets PSAC, 1963 Believing that “perhaps it’s a chance to straighten out some thinking,” Carson met with PSAC panel for nearly a day on January 26, 1963 She impressed the panel members as being more moderate and sensible than they expected from reading some of the more dramatic passages in her book

16 Social Construction of Science Policy
PSAC produced first report on pesticides in early 1963 which confirmed Carson’s warning that pesticides represented an unknown and potential serious threat to environmental and human health USDA and FDA attacked it for siding with Rachel Carson and emphasized too much the harmful effects of pesticides USDA: Report “could profoundly damage U. S. agriculture” and “lead to a breakdown of public confidence in control programs, pesticide use, research scientists and their findings, governmental regulations of pesticides, and the safety and wholesomeness of our food supply.” Interior supported the report and demanded regulatory power.

17 Compromise and Principles
The PSAC panel agreed that inter-state and international food was safe but not necessarily within the state. PSAC further rejected the USDA’s request to remove the only passage in the report where they paid a quiet but warm tribute to Rachel Carson’s work: “Public literature and the experiences of Panel members indicated that, until the publication of ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson, people were generally unaware of the toxicity of pesticides.” The USDA: “such a reference to a commercially available publication is inappropriate in a scientific report.” PSAC: The Panel members felt that “it would be a deliberate slight if they did not make reference to the book.”

18 PSAC Report on Pesticides
Recognizing "the use of pesticides must be continued" for food production and control of diseases, the report focused on the unknown hazards of pesticides, especially in low dosages and emphasized, as did Carson, that the pesticide problem was only one of many that threatened the environment. The public had a need to know even as the problems admitted of no easy technological fix, the panel pointed out: The panel “can suggest ways of avoiding or lessening the hazards, but in the end society must decide, and to do so it must obtain adequate information on which to base its judgments.” Regulatory policy: “The decision is an uncomfortable one which can never be final but must be constantly in flux as circumstances change and knowledge increases.”

19 Policy Transparency, Public’s Right to Know, Education, and Research
“The Panel believes that all data used as a basis for granting registration and establishing tolerances should be published, thus allowing the hypotheses and the validity and reliability of the data to be subjected to critical review by the public and the scientific community.” The PSAC report advocated expanded federal research and public education programs on the effects of pesticides.

20 Reactions to PSAC Report
Scientific publications, such as Science and Chemical and Engineering News, which had both published damning reviews of Carson’s book, now joined the popular press in applauding the report. New evidence about the harmful effects of pesticides contained in the PSAC report and incidents of fish kill due to pesticides in the Mississippi since Silent Spring first appeared must have had an impact. Kennedy: “I have already requested the responsible agencies to implement the recommendations in this report, including the preparation of legislative and technical proposals which I shall submit to the Congress.”

21 Carson Delighted by PSAC Report
“I think no one can read this report and retain a shred of complacency about our situation.” EPA: “Conflict of interest should be eliminated completely”; “The Commission should be made up of citizens of high professional competence in such fields as medicine, genetics, biology, and conservation.” Carson’s positive experience with the PSAC pesticide panel contributed to the idea itself.

22 Significance of PSAC Report
In retrospect, the real contribution of the PSAC report was probably its critical role in changing public and official opinion of the environmental problems discussed in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. By the weight of its own investigation, its scientific prestige, and its proximity to presidential power, the PSAC group helped to certify the seriousness of Carson’s seemingly radical claims of environmental cataclysms.

23 美国现代环境运动的开启： 卡尔逊《寂静的春天》（1962） 美国总统科学顾问委员会报告. 《农药的使用》（１９６３）
美国现代环境运动的开启： 卡尔逊《寂静的春天》（1962） 美国总统科学顾问委员会报告 《农药的使用》（１９６３） 《恢复我们的环境质量》（１９６５） 卡逊和总统科顾委同持技术怀疑论

24 卡逊, 1907-1964 海洋生物学家和科普作家 曾任职于美国鱼类与野生生物署， 1936-1952
写过关于海洋的畅销书，尤以《我们周围的海洋》(The Sea around US) (1952)为最有名 １９５８－１９６２写作《寂静的春天》(Silent Spring) 被称为改变世界历史的几本书之一 开启了现代美国环境运动

25 《寂静的春天》的技术怀疑论 选自卡逊著，吕瑞兰译，《寂静的春天》，吉林人民出版社，1997版：
“控制自然”这个词是一个妄自尊大的想象产物，是当生物学和哲学还处于低级幼稚阶段时的产物，当时人们设想中的“控制自然”就是要大自然为人们的方便有利而存在。 应用昆虫学。。。这样一门如此原始的科学却己经被用最现代化、最可怕的化学武器武装起来了； 这些武器在被用来对付昆虫之余，已转过来威胁着我们整个的大地了，这真是我们的巨大不幸。

26 总统科顾委的技术怀疑论 选译自《农药的使用》： “我们必须更彻底的了解这些化学物品的性能，以及它们对各生物系统，包括人类的长远影响。
“我们小组的各项建议是以这些方面的需求为目标的，以使得我们能更审慎的使用这些农药或其他控制病虫害的方法，以求得冒最小的风险来达到最大的增益。 “这个小组可以建议如何避免或减少风险，但最终社会必须来做出决定，然而社会要做决定必须占有足够的信息才能做出判断。 “小组认为，应该发表所有那些用来决断是否颁发注册或设定允许残留量的数据，这可以让公众和科学共同体来核查那些假设和数据的有效性和可靠性。 “公众文献和小组成员的经历显示，在雷切尔-卡逊的《寂静的春天》发表之前，人们一般不知道农药的毒性”。

27 卡逊与总统科顾委 卡逊唤起公众的环境意识，而PSAC改变了科学共同体的意识，把这个问题转化为政府和总统层面的公共政策 二者都强调：
要控制自然先要理解自然 科学是理解自然的必由之路 技术是必要的，但盲目技术乐观主义有危害性 公众的“知的权利”／民主的重要性

28 科学、技术、与环境 卡逊和总统科顾委皆非反科学或反技术
二者皆希望公众了解技术的局限性，并倡导合适技术（appropriate technology) 科学研究是防止技术滥用或破坏自然的重要环节 在一个技术乐观的时代更需要专业、独立的专家来提醒我们有必要对技术保持怀疑态度

29 美国政府第一个综合环境报告 总统科顾委在《农药的使用》研究基础上提出综合研究环境问题 约翰逊总统１９６４年提出的“伟大社会”计划一部分
民间环保运动非常重要，但要真正改变现状必须在公共政策上入手 总统科顾委１９６４－１９６５年完成《恢复我们的环境质量》(Restoring the Quality of Our Environment) 报告 美国现代环境史上的一个里程碑：第一个综合环境报告 President Johnson publicly announced the possibility of global warming in a special message to Congress

30 1965年报告的内容 联邦政府首先应减少各部门操作中的污染排放 制定措施，尤其是经济鼓励措施，来促使全国上下减少污染
加强环保方面的研究和人才培养 11个分组，包括：环境人力资源，污染对人的影响，对其他生物系统的影响，二氧化碳的温室效应，土壤污染，病虫害控制，各种废物处理。 提出一个没有污染的环境，就像教育一样，应该是一个基本人权 100多个建议 提议污染税 零污染车辆

31 1965年PSAC报告：全球变暖的警钟 “到2000年，大气层中的二氧化碳将比现在的含量增加25%”
“这将如此改变大气层的热平衡，以至于气候会发生明显的变化，而这变化将是局部甚至全国性的措施所不能控制的” 建议加强这方面的研究 提议采取能够防止或减缓这个趋势的一些措施 包括向低碳排放的能源转移 约翰逊总统1965年2月向国会提交“关于自然美丽的特殊国会咨文” “通过放射性物质和燃烧化石燃料而产生的与日递增的二氧化碳，我们这代人已经在全球范围上改变了大气层的构成”.

32 为什么没有马上采取行动？ 对报告和总统咨文有一些报道，但不显著 当时连科学家也承认，问题还不是特别清楚
不像其他污染问题如水污染、空气污染那么迫切 至少下意识上可能认为将来肯定会找到技术措施解决问题 越南战争很快就占据了约翰逊和整个国家的精力，无暇顾及全球变暖问题

33 Science, Technology, and Environment
Neither Carson nor PSAC was anti-science or anti-technology They wanted the public to recognize the limits of any technological solutions and advocate the use of appropriate technologies They advocated scientific research as a way to prevent the abuse of technologies or nature itself Technological skepticism by competent experts is still needed in our age of new technological enthusiasm marked by information and bio technologies.