| OCR Text |
Show 4 THE SIGNPOST Monday, February 11, 1991 fiOKOJEia. Bush needs stronger stand on alternative energy development By Paul B. Johnson Managing editor of The Signpost It chokes our air, taints our waters and robs us of our economic security. For the immediate ease of lifestyle it offers, though future consequences await, we send our children to die on a foreign shore to defend our right to partake of it. Though we see the symptoms and recognize the addiction, we take no steps to cure ourselves. The Bush administration will announce its prescription for a healthier America in the form of a national energy plan expected to be presented to Congress later this month. It is a prescription we do not need, because it only offers more of the drug on which our society already has come to depend. As the Associated Press reported Saturday, Bush's new national energy strategy takes few steps to improve energy conservation or to encourage the production of safe, alternative energy resources. Instead, the plan offers a call "to stimulate oil production" in the United States, which includes opening Alaskan wildlife refuges to exploration, and makes no mention of Congressional proposals to require automobile manufacturers to increase fuel efficiency. Especially in light of the Persian Gulf crisis, the endorsement of such a plan is nothing less than ludicrous. Though there are other justifiable concerns for sending our troops, namely stopping the threat of a power-hungry dictator, the fact that we depend on oil for so much in our lives is undeniably a major factor for our military presence. The war exposes just how vulnerable we are, how rising gas prices can increase the cost of not only food but nearly every product imaginable. The answer is to not only decrease America's reliance on The Signpost Edrtor-ln-chtef Manoging editor News edrtor Senior reporter Sports edrtor Asst. Sports edrtor Arts edrtor Asst. Arts editor Special Edrtions edrtor Asst. Special Editions edrtor Copy edrtor Asst. Copy edrtor Photo editor Asst. Photo editor Production manager Asst. Production manager Asst. Ads Production manager Ads manager Asst. Ads manager Secretary Advisor Asst. Advbor - Editorial Publisher The Signpost is published Monday, Wednesday and Friday during fait winter and spring quarter. Subscriptions are $9 per quarter. Classified ad deadline is two days before publication. foreign oil, as the Bush administration proposes, but to decrease America's reliance altogether.Conservation is a vital role in any such plan, and automobile companies should be required to continue to improve fuel economy. With the necessary monetary support and commitment to change, any technological obstacles if they in fact exist would be overcome. Oil will likely always be a major component of our economy, but using it as if it were a endless resource, as we have been doing, is a disastrous mistake. Through its conservation and by moving to cleaner and better means of power, we will have not only cleaner air but a more independent economy, unarguably a step in the right direction.Similarly, the Bush administration needs to take a stronger stand in encouraging the development of alternative resources. Electric cars, once thought of as slow and cumbersome, are at the point where they could serve as a reasonable replacement, if they have government and corporate support to ensure their acceptance. Other possibilities include testing the viability of fuel produced from grain, which would provide a constantly renewable resource. Congress needs to pass stringent legislation that would require such research, and offer financial incentives in the forms of tax breaks to encourage it. Perhaps some of these proposals can be laughed off as idealistic and unfeasible, but they are necessary steps in securing a better future. We need broad public support and the endorsement of an energy policy that considers the needs of the future ratherthan the "quickfix" and ultimately detrimental solution of today. Only then would America begin to recover from its addiction to become truly healthy. Staff Necta Palmer Paul B. Johnson Lorin J. May Joyce Za brisk te Akin Hinckley Scott D. Summers C. Mark Howard Janet Cisowskl Debbie Boman Sarah Hansen Shawn Peterson Jona Jacobs Jim Sawdey Danielle Ma bey Joy Stoeckl Justin C. Scott John Child Brand! Johnson Carrie Jardine Linda Harrington P. lorry Stahks Dale S. Oberer Dr. Randolph J. Scott Stronger campus recycling efforts could help fund library, student says To the editor, Much has been said these days about recycling, but more needs to be said and done. The large, black containers for recycling aluminum cans as seen around the campus is a good initial step, but there should be more provided for this worthy cause. By practice in improving the Guest editorial Biological By Alan Stockland WSU Microbiology Department Biological warfare (BW) is not a recent development of "civilized man." Historical accounts of crude biological warfare go back hundreds of years, but there were undoubtedly attempts at it even thousands of ago. In 184 BC, Hannibal, in his war against Rome, had snakes packed in clay pots which he hurled onto enemy ships. The Romans apparently "retired in .7 if' ..f Letters to the editor policy The Signpost welcome letters to the editor, Letters musl be typed and should not exceed 300 words.. For lengthier exposition, arrangements may be made with the editor In chief. Letters must include name, address, phone number, relationship to WSU (i.e. student, staff, Ogden resident, etc.) and the signature of the writer. Letters without this information ML02 be printed, :: The Signpost reserves the right lo edit for reasons of space and libel and reserves the right to refuse lo print any letter. Bring letters to the editorial office In UB 267 or send them to: , ThB Signpost Weber State University Ogden, UT, 84406-2110 An: Editor-ln-chtef environment we could provide more funds to the library. The funds received from the recycling project would be contributed to the Weber State library. I believe there should be more emphasis on recycling in the Union Building and the resident halls. Currently, some floors in Promontory Tower are collecting CLEARED BY POTGdN CEN53fS warfare nothing new confusion." In 1347 AD, Tartars used catapults to hurl bodies of plague victims over the walled city of Kaffa in the Crimea in order to demoralize the defenders. It seemed to have worked; however, the Tartars withdrew when many of their own began to die of plague. Serious interest of germ warfare in the U.S. goes back to WWII, and research continued unti!1971 mainly at Fort Det rick, MD, when then President Nixon placed a moratorium on germ warfare research. Studies on potential agents (e.g. anthrax) were also being carried out at Dugway Laboratories in Utah. Actually, BW is not necessarily directed against human targets, but can also be directed against food sources such as livestock or crops. BW which is directed against humans does not even have to cause fatalities. Since the aim may be to incapacitate soldiers quickly without necessarily killing, influenza would probably be one of the most effective diseases. The flu virus also undergoes genetic changesquiteeasilyand thismakes effectiveness of vaccinations uncertain. Whereas most of the early agents studied were bacteria, and the diseases (e.g. plague, typhoid, anthrax) stirred up much fear, we can generally protect ourselves against them by sanitation, vaccines and antibiotics. Viruses can be quite another matter. Sanitation and vaccines may help the beverage cans and paper for recycling, but I feel if the ASWSU could make an extra effort to extend this project to the Union Building and the resident halls, the library fund goal could be more easily achieved, as well as provide a better environment. Fazley A. Azhar WSU student prevent some viral diseases for example, hepatitis-A and polio, but most chemotherapeutic agents (e.g. antibiotics) are ineffective in preventing or treating them. Since we're often unsure how viral agents are transmitted (e.g. Lassa fever) prevention could be built. Some viruses, such as the causative agent of foot and mouth disease in cows, could be a very serious threat to the livestock industry in any country where cattle are of economic significance. In essentially all cases, however, BW would be most devastating in developing countries, whether it be directed against food sources or humans. We may argue about the immorality of BW since in this technological age the United States and its allies do not have to resort to this form of warfare; however, that doesn't mean we should not know how to defend ourselves against such types of weapons. We shouldn't stop research into protecting ourselves even if we abjure the use of BW. From an ethical standpoint, I have trouble saying one form of warfare is morally more acceptable than another. Personally, I am less afraid of BW than of the proposed neutron bomb or of "conventional" nuclear warfare, but then I might have felt differently before the time of vaccines, chemotherapy and good sanitation. In any case, BW is "hit and miss," whereas nuclear and traditional weapons are able to kill with amazing equality. |
