Where are the Limits?

I would like to comment more on the issues that are raised in the previous post. I think that we can apply some of the ideas that we discussed in class last week to the controversy surrounding the building of this cement plant. The most obvious connection I made was when we were discussing the difficulty that has become contemporary environmental politics. It is impossible to do or build anything today. Personally, I am not sure whether I believe that we as a nation are a bit overprotective or not, but the critics of this plant sound very familiar to the critics of that nuclear power plant that we were discussing last week. I understand that there is a difference between coal and nuclear power, but when do we as a nation draw the line in what can and cannot be build, and on what grounds we can deem something environmental hazardous. I mean I could argue with my local community that I think that the trash should not be collected every week because garbage trucks only contribute to the emissions that cars let into the atmosphere, or someone could also argue that all houses should be run with solar energy, because all other energy sources are harmful and unnecessary. In both of these cases, I would probably be laughed at or lose, but the point is that we need to draw a line between what is environmentally harmful to a certain area, community, and region, and what is not harmful. I am not sure what should be considered environmentally harmful or not, it just seems as though anyone can make any claim to a potential threat on the environment, and either delay the process of building something or stop the process all together. I think in this specific circumstance, you would have to look to the advantages of constructing a new plant and compare them to the disadvantages, and if the plant is truly an environmentally friendly plant, than it should be build based on those grounds. Another area of concern is the ability to maintain the aesthetic beauty of New York, and the potential harm a cement factor would have on this goal. This seems to mirror the Storm King Mountain argument in the sense that people will see the construction of this plant as intrusive to the mystery and beauty that is New York. This argument also follows the same thought process as the previously mentioned argument, as their needs to be a line drawn between what is and what is not acceptable. I think that the controversy over the construction of the cement plant could be lessened if each side could come to some sort of agreement about what is necessary and the limits to the environmental and aesthetic issues that surround the building of this plant.