- The Washington Times - Thursday, May 19, 2011

The Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN) has chosen Friday as the National Day of Prayer for Creation Care. While I’m wholeheartedly in favor of praying for a clean, healthful, beautiful Earth every day, I’m cautious about this campaign.

What raised my concern was the campaign’s central emphasis this year: “The day will focus on the impacts of mercury on the unborn,” EEN said in an email. Then, on its website, the page called “Mercury & the Unborn” claimed, “Approximately one in every six babies in the U.S. are born with harmful mercury levels in their blood.” Finally, a fact sheet on “Mercury and the Unborn Child” claimed, “The main source of mercury pollution is dirty air released by coal-burning power plants.”

Those three statements raised my suspicions and set me about obeying Scripture’s command to “test all things, hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

Attorney General William Barr says FBI may have acted in 'bad faith'
House Judiciary Committee to vote on Trump impeachment charges Wednesday
Obama spied on an opponent and the FBI lied repeatedly. Trump is being impeached?

The reference to coal-burning power plants was suspect immediately. Why? First, about 70 percent of mercury deposited in the United States actually comes from non-U.S. sources. Second, coal has been in the greens’ cross hairs for decades. Yet coal power plants provide about 50 percent of America’s electricity (as EEN admits) at a fraction of the cost and with much greater reliability than “green” alternatives such as wind and solar (which EEN promotes). Affordable, reliable electricity is crucial to human well-being. The drive to reduce its use conveniently serves radical environmentalists’ desire to deindustrialize Western civilization - a goal that would necessitate a much smaller, much poorer, much less healthy, much shorter-lived human population. EEN doesn’t share this radical environmentalist goal, but by joining the effort to reduce coal use, it promotes it, even if unintentionally.

Ironically, this means EEN’s promotion of stiff mercury-emission regulations, which would force reduced use of coal and steep increases in electricity prices, links concern for the unborn (a clear appeal to Christians’ pro-life sympathies) with a radical environmentalist agenda that EEN does not embrace - an agenda that is distinctly anti-human and would lead to far higher rates of disease and premature death than the mercury exposure EEN wants to reduce - even if its claims about mercury were true.

But they’re not.

The statistical claims also are suspect. I’d seen similar claims before - about half a dozen years ago. The campaign’s literature offers no source for the statistics. Their most likely origin, however, seems to be an ad by the environmental advocacy group Friends of the Earth in USA Today in 2004 that claimed, “One in six American women of childbearing age has absorbed enough mercury to endanger a developing fetus” and, “630,000 babies are born each year with a dangerous level of mercury in their blood.” There’s another possible source. Not long before that ad appeared, Natural Resources Defense Council’s (NRDC) Climate Center Director David Hawkins testified before Congress, saying, “One in 12 [not six] women of childbearing age has mercury levels above EPA’s safe health threshold. … Nationally, this translates into … more than 300,000 newborns at risk of neurological impairment from exposure in utero.”

Those claims, however, badly exaggerated findings of a survey of mercury in Americans’ blood by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In reality, fewer than one in 1,000 American women had levels as high as those associated with even very subtle neurological effects (not with broader cognitive and intellectual performance) in children.

What accounts for the difference between “one in six” or “one in 12” and “one in 1,000”? The NRDC and Friends of the Earth confused what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls the “reference dose” with “a dangerous level.”

The EPA’s reference dose is intentionally set unrealistically low - kind of like the old rabbinic tradition of building a “fence around the law.” For instance, because Mosaic law forbade working on the Sabbath, the rabbis determined not to spit on a dirty rock on the Sabbath, lest the spittle perform the work of moving some dirt - though they were free to spit on a clean rock.

The EPA’s reference dose is like that. It is multiples lower than necessary to ensure safety. To put it differently, while the EPA is sure there’s no significant risk of harm at exposures below the reference dose, it doesn’t assert that exposures above it are harmful.

As a result, claims that mercury emissions from coal power plants are putting one in six unborn babies at risk of neurological harm are at best badly exaggerated and at worst outright false. Rather than one in six (which would be about 690,000), the number is more likely about one in 1,000 (about 4,130). And the risk of harm to them actually is vanishingly small, while the harm, when it does occur, is so subtle as to be almost undetectable.

The National Day of Prayer for Creation Care sounds like a good idea. Those behind it, no doubt, sincerely want to help others. I applaud their motives - but things just aren’t quite so simple.

By all means, pray - and work - for a clean, healthful and beautiful planet. And while you’re at it, pray for discernment, for yourself and all God’s people.

E. Calvin Beisner is founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation.

Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide