EDITORIAL: ENVIRONMENTAL CATCH 22

The road to environmental ruin may be paved with good intentions, but
disastrous ends don't differentiate between good and bad.

It's not too late for Florida to avoid a potential environmental disaster,
but the Environmental Protection Agency learned the hard way about defending
air-cleaning ingredients added to gasoline sold in big cities. Turns out the
stuff that was cleaning the air was also polluting the water.

Now the EPA, which had previously promoted the use of the pollution-fighting
chemical called MTBE, is backpedaling about its dubious benefits. After
receiving a report detailing how easily the chemical additive dissolves in
water and can contaminate tap water systems with suspected carcinogens, the
agency is rushing to reverse a rule mandated by the Clean Air Act of 1990.

EPA administrator Carol Browner wants Congress to withdraw the order that
oil companies supplying those regions of the nation that have heavy air
pollution must add the chemical to all gasoline sold so that engines run
better and tailpipe pollution is reduced.

A panel studying the adverse environmental effects of MTBE discovered it had
seeped into local water supplies either through gas spills or underground
storage tank leaks. Besides tainting the drinking water, the chemical also
disrupted the beneficial work of microbes in the soil that digest natural
hydrocarbons, rendering them harmless.

Much to its dismay, the EPA realized what was curing one ill - namely air
pollution caused by exhaust fumes - was actually creating another type of
harmful pollution. California was so concerned that significant amounts of
its water supply would be made unusable by MTBE that it ordered oil
companies to phase out use of the chemical by 2002. The EPA granted the
state special dispensation to develop its own clean air policies because
smoggy Los Angeles is more polluted than the rest of the country.

In weighing the advantages and disadvantages of environmental policy, the
EPA's balancing act is similar to a dilemma facing Florida. The state wants
to introduce a foreign, living substance into the environment - a
marijuana-eating fungus - to eradicate a thriving criminal crop in the
state.

Florida drug czar Jim McDonough notes that 47 per cent of the marijuana
seized in the United States comes from the Sunshine State and much of it is
home-grown. The proposed solution is a bioherbicide, specifically engineered
to attack only marijuana plants. But, like the EPA's move to stem air
pollution, Florida's fungus battle plan also portends environmental
problems.

While the state is studying the pros and cons of using biological agents to
destroy illegal narcotic plants, critics are voicing alarm about what the
soil fungus could wind up destroying besides marijuana. Bill Graves, senior
biologist at the University of Florida Research Center, worries about the
fungus possibly mutating, with nightmarish consequences.

"I believe that if this fungus is unleashed for this kind of problem, it's
going to create its own problems. If it isn't executed effectively, it's
going to target and kill rare and endangered plants," he said.

We hope Florida will scrap its latest strategy to fight the state's
marijuana growers before it gains much more support.

As even the EPA can attest, good intentions are not always reason enough to
mess with Mother Nature.