The Chlorine Debate: How White Do You Want It? Essay -- essays researc

The atomic number 17 Debate How White Do You Want It?     Chlorine is superstar of the worlds most widely used chemics, the buildingelement rattling to almost every United States industry. We use chlorine andchlorine-based products whenever we drink a glass of water, buy food wrapped inplastic, purchase stimulate in the supermarket, pour bleach into a washing machine, go for a prescription filled, print out a computer document equal this one, or evendrive a car. (Abelson 94)     Chlorine, a member of the halogen (salt-forming) theme of metallicelements, was first made by Swedish chemist Carl Wilhelm Scheele in 1774, whotreated hydrochloric acid with manganese dioxide. In 1810, the English chemistSir Humphrey Davy hardened that chlorine was a chemical element and named itfrom the Greek word kernel greenish-yellow. One hundred and eighty-five yearslater, chlorine compounds are ubiquitous components in the manufacturing ofpaper, plastic s, insecticides, cleaning fluids, antifreeze, paints, medicines,and petroleum products. The unfortunate and unavoidable by-product of thesemanufacturing processes is dioxin, one of the most toxic substances on theplanet earth. Dioxins are also produced whenever chlorine containing substances,such as PVC, are burned.     Life as we know it entrust change, if a Greenpeace campaign is successful.The powerful environmental group has mounted a well-organized campaign that hasas its objective nothing less than a total, oecumenic ban on chlorine. With thepublic health and billions of dollars at stake, the debate everyplace chlorine hasbecome one of the worlds most contentious and controversial issues. "Is achlorine-free future possible?" asked Bonnie Rice, a spokesperson forGreenpeaces Chlorine unloose Campaign. "Yes, it can be do without massivedisruption of the economy and of society, if it is done in the right matter."(Gossen 94)   &n bsp The chlorine industry and its allies say a total ban on chlorine wouldbe neither wise, possible, nor economically feasible. "We find the chlorinecampaign outrageous in its scope and purpose," explained king of beasts Anziano, theChairman of the Washington-based Chlorine Chemistry Council, and organizationthat lobbies on behalf of the chlorine industry. "We deal its bas... ...ingly undecidable debate, thebasis of the debate seems to be the solution. Banning or getting disembarrass ofchlorine, organochlorines, or most any other chemical can except cause moreproblems than they leave alone solve unless a proven and hard-hitting alternative isdeveloped to take the place of that chemical. Most insouciant things would haveto drastically be altered to make suit for a all over chlorine ban, and thatwould take a great deal of time, effort, and money to do.     If a ban on chlorine was implemented, who would be responsible for the hail and alimo ny of switching the equipment the consumer, the producer,Greenpeace and other environmental watch organizations, or the government? Thebrunt of the cost would most likely fall into the hands of the consumers, whichwould kill most center(a) and lower-class families.     Chlorine is a building block of most of our everyday conveniences and amajor player in most chemical compounds. Until a sturdy and cost-effectivealternative is made, most of the everyday consumers will still have to go onusing the same chlorine and organochlorine-based products that they have usedfor years before.