The Case for Optimal Pollution by William F. Baxter

The Case for Optimal Pollution by William F. Baxter
Baxter asserts that the issue of pollution is better handled when the solution is human-oriented. He says that environmentalists fail to make any substantial improvements because they wish that humans stopped polluting the environment for the sake of the plants and animals. The example used is the effects of DDT in farming to Penguins. He goes further to suggest that most people may act that they care about the welfare of penguins, but they will continue to use DDT. Baxter posits that telling people that there is an alternative to DDT which can lead to better farm yields would work better.
More so, he developed a criterion of ‘why’ where people are compelled to check the advantages of doing some things as opposed to others. A good example is why people should save penguins? He says the answer is humans enjoy watching them. Focusing on human merits to environmental changes works because clean air and water also favor plants and animals. The general proposition becomes that humans are not the means but the end product. He hopes that such a philosophy will draw more people in.
Also, he talks about what is really valuable, wealth. Money is regarded as value checks, but the true resources are the goods and services individuals are willing to forego to make a difference. The efforts and capital placed on planting trees, cleaning the air, and protecting rivers is the true goal of pollution control. The notion of the exchange of one choice for another allows optimization of resources such as time and capital.

Baxter suggests that pollution control should be a collection of time, capital, tools, and human labor aimed for change.