Protectia Mediului

 

According to Bataga et al (1995), catalytic converters are devices made of a ceramic body that constitutes the support for an active material - an alloy of rare metals. The catalytic converter, located on the gas exhaust pipe, transforms the combination of polluting molecules of CO and NO_x into a new combination of CO₂ and N₂. This new combination is considered by the authors as nonpolluting; however, at some other point, they agree that by introducing catalytic converters the fight is directed toward CO and NO_x pollution, while CO₂ effects in the atmosphere are being considered secondary and, to a certain extent, neglected [7]. Consequently, the effect of introducing these catalytic converters for an area where an increased number of cars has been registered, as the Romanian Capital, is the increased level of CO₂ in the air. Researchers show that 23 percent of the carbon emissions in the city is generated by transport activities, of which 80-90 percent is imputable to road transport (MAPPM, 2002).

 

Catalytic converters have only recently been introduced as compulsory in Romania, but only for imported cars and for Romanian newly produced cars, while the older cars are allowed to be driven without having incorporated these systems that reduce CO and NO_x pollution (Reglementari, 2002). Thus, we are confronting a situation characterized by increased levels of CO and NO_x emissions (from old cars), as well as CO₂ emissions (as a “perverse effect” [8] of the new cars). Furthermore, as I will show below, the effects of CO and NO_x emissions also contribute to increasing CO₂ concentrations in the atmosphere. To manage the situation, a series of special measures are needed.

 

2.1. Applying The “Polluter-Pays Principle”

 

Considering as of great importance the decrease in CO and NO_x emissions in the air, the Romanian government decided to apply the “polluter-pays principle” (Miller, 2003, 552)  and in the same time to strengthen the necessity of catalytic converters by also using a market based instrument (MBI): differentiated taxes for vehicles. Thus, monthly and annual taxes are considerably higher for vehicles that pollute more because of their weight or because of not using catalytic converters (Ro-vignette, n.d., Tarife suplimentare, n.d.).

 

But this is not an effective measure. Firstly, this measure does not take into consideration the negative impact on the environment caused by CO₂ emissions from the catalytic converters. Secondly, as Carter affirms, “by putting a price on the environment, MBIs effectively allow firms or individuals to buy the right to carry on polluting” (2001, 301). Thus, in change of higher amounts of money, people are practically allowed to pollute the atmosphere by using old cars without catalytic converters. Thirdly, what the government did not take into consideration is population’s response because of “the potential inequity, or regressive impact, of MBIs. By raising the price of some environmentally sensitive goods […] eco-taxes discriminate against lower income groups because a larger share of their disposable income goes on these basic needs than is spent by higher income groups” (ibid). A recent survey conducted by Open Society Foundation (2003) shows that more than two thirds of the Romanian population consider that their incomes are enough only to meet their basic needs or not even enough to meet their basic needs.  Consequently, the negative response toward any kind of tax is considerable (Cilinca, n.d.; Sandu, 2000) and the may either simply not pay the requested tax, or may manifest their disapproval through even more visible actions, as street demonstrations and petitions addressed to the governments. These manifestations are usually guided by certain groups of interests and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as taxi drivers companies or members of the Romanian Automobile Club. In 1999 and 2000, the latter organized a series of protests and addressed petitions to the government; all these were focused on the burden the introduction of supplementary taxes places on the shoulders of automobile owners (Duta, 1999; ACR protesteaza, 2000). Fourthly, it is not likely for people who have cars that pollute more to change them soon, especially because the reason above discussed – their lower incomes. It is however more likely for low-income people to pay the annual tax than to buy a new car [9]. However, the government aimed at determining low-income people to change old cars by implementing two additional measures: a leasing system and cuts of import taxes for certain cars (Renault or imported machine parts for Dacia), so that the price could be considered as reasonable for the low-income buyer also. But even if designed for low-income groups, both these measures are advantageous in fact only for the middle class, because the monthly leasing rate and new car prices are much higher than the low-income classes could afford.

 

2.2. Protecting The Low-Income Groups From The Impact Of The Annual Tax

 

There are many options “to offset the regressive impact” (Carter, 2001, 301) of the annual vehicle tax. One of them would be “to return the revenue raised by the eco-tax directly to low-income groups, perhaps through cuts in income tax or increased welfare payments” (ibid). This is a good idea because it practically protects low-income groups from the negative impact of the tax. But the same problem of the impact over the population’s negative response must be brought into discussion; the tax would still have to be paid and the idea of paying taxes in itself is likely to produce a generally negative reaction, especially when prices for personal transportation goods and services are generally high (i.e. the fuel price/average national income ratio is three times higher in Romania that in the European Union member states (MLPTL, 2001)). However, implementing a measure that return the eco-tax to low-income groups in form of welfare payments should have a positive effect by raising personal/family monthly financial resources. If not specifying that the respective supplementary amount of money represent in fact the eco-tax (in order not to clash with the measures that stimulate people to change cars), such a measure should be effective. Another idea would be to make the tax proportional to population’s incomes, so that its effects should be the same for everybody. But in this situation measures to stimulate people to change cars would be made less effective. As one can see, the problem is difficult, but there are things that can be adjusted, with positive results.

 

One of them would be to solve the problem of corruption. As Manoleli (2003) states, Romanian people do not trust the authorities because they believe “corruption is generalized, it appears at all levels” (OSF, 2003, 17); consequently, they cannot be sure that the taxes they pay are indeed used for the stated purposes. However, corruption has been fought, but only for short time. According to the same author, certain laws are still necessary “in order to prove that […] the intentions to combat corruption – the main scourge that splinters Romania – are actually put into practice: the Law on Conflicts of Interests, the Transparency Law […], the Law on Lobbying and the law regarding officials’ money, goods and properties declaration” (2003, 10 (my translation)). Visible positive results consequent to the implementation of these laws will increase people’s trust in local and national authorities and subsequently their trust in regulations they have to follow and taxes they have to pay.

 

2.3. Reforestation – An Option To Be Taken Into Consideration

 

Another option to counteract the effects of the annual vehicle tax would be to replace it (or to add) a fossil fuel tax used by the local administration to reforest certain areas in Bucharest, which would directly impact on the CO₂ levels in the atmosphere [10]. As shown above, CO₂ emissions from the catalytic converters constitute an important part of the total CO₂ in the air. The effects of high concentrations of CO₂ from catalytic converters in the air are magnified by “acid deposition” (Miller, 2003, 428). As showed in the introduction, CO and NO_x mainly resulted from cars without catalysts [11] form secondary pollutants in the atmosphere (such as nitric acid vapors or particles of nitrate salts), well known as “acid deposition”. Miller (ibid) describes how “acid deposition”, often along with other substances in the air, causes direct damage on trees and other plants, leading to their death. Tree death adds carbon in the atmosphere, and meanwhile decreases the capacity of the “terrestrial sink” (Grace, 2001, 621) to sequestrate carbon.

 

Deforestation is another anthropogenic activity with the same effect. According to Rizea (2002), specialists determined that, because of the high density of the population and the increased traffic, Bucharest would necessitate green areas amounted to 2,794.5 ha. Today, it has less than half. Furthermore, it seems that it is not one of district authorities’ priorities to protect these areas, as they decided to cut even more in order to build commercial and business centers.

 

The proposed eco-tax for reforestation would adjust these effects, by diminishing the increased CO₂ levels in the air. But this kind of eco-tax also raises some problems. Firstly, it could also raise again population’s negative response because of its impact on incomes. Secondly, money collected from such a tax can be used for multiple purposes, i.e. to improve public transport services and to subsidize public transports ticket prices in order to make public transport more attractive to the residents in Bucharest and consequently decrease personal car use in the city.

 

As John Grace says, “we must regard forests as only one of the several measures that must be taken to reduce CO₂ concentrations in the atmosphere” (2001, 626). But reforestation is an especially important measure to be considered by the local authorities, because “photosynarticle releases one molecule of O₂ for every CO₂ taken up” (ibid, 612), thus cleaning the atmosphere and subsequently diminishing CO₂ negative impact on human health.

 

However, researchers at Open Society Foundation in Romania show that, in spite of the low levels of incomes, Romanian’s population attitudes toward environment are positive. In May 2003, more than half of the population did not agree that “the protection of the environment is less important than the protection of people’s jobs”, only 26 percent agreed with this affirmation, while 20 percent have not expressed any opinion (ibid, 58) [12]. Furthermore, another survey conducted in 2002 shows that, of the total Romanian population, almost half would definitely support environmental actions; however, 20 percent of the population does not have an opinion upon environmental actions (Ministry of Environment of the Czech Republic, 2002). This may be caused by a lack of information about environmental organizations’ goals, targets and ways of action. Another example of peoples’ positive attitudes is a public campaign organized by ECOSENS, a Romanian environmental NGO. The campaign was aimed at decreasing the traffic on a much circulated street in Bucharest; to achieve this goal, ECOSENS tried to involve the administrators of the block of flats, as well as the residents, into a series of actions – addressing petitions to the local authorities, public debates, and press conferences. In spite of a low participation from the residents’ side, the persons who got involved proved very active and the result was that the circulation of vehicles on the street was changed from one way to two ways, a measure that decreased the medium number of cars circulating per hour on the respective street (Campanie de participare publica, n.d.).

 

These last two examples show that the time for the environmental NGOs to enter the scene has come. They should strengthen population’s positive attitudes towards the protection of the environment and decrease the negative response toward MBIs aimed at environmental protection (i.e. the proposed fossil fuel tax to be used by the local administration to reforest certain areas in Bucharest). They should overpass the “informal contact and influence” and petitions phase toward actions more and more based on “scientific research and reports”, “consumer boycotts”, even “court actions” and other more radical interventions (Connelly and Smith, 2001, 78).

 

But environmental Romanian NGOs’ problems are basically their low visibility and reduced implication at the decision-making levels. In other words, environmental Romanian NGOs are still weak and powerless. Two main reasons explain this weak position. Firstly, according to Carter, it is the middle class that support and promote the environmental movements. “New social movements generally, and environmentalists in particular”, Carter says, “are predominantly drawn from the middle class. […] [I]t may be that the new middle classes hold attitudes and values that encourage their concern for the environment” (2001, 88-89) [13]. The Romanian middle class counts only for 9-10 percent of the population (AOAR, 1999). The Public Opinion Barometer realized in May 2003 clearly shows that the Romanians are aware of this situation and that it is easy even for the ordinary people to perceive the structure of the population as formed by “few elites at the top, very few people in the middle and the biggest part of the population at the bottom" (OSF, 2003, 30-31 and Appendix C). Thus, there is a lack of supporters for the green movements, and this is confirmed by the weak position of the green parties. Out of eight existent green Romanian parties and political movements, only one member succeeded to be a member of the parliament during 1992-1996 (Camera Deputatilor, 2003; University of Essex, 2002). However, the situation in Romania is likely to improve in the years to come and the middle class is likely to increase in dimensions and in power (OSF, 2003). Population’s real incomes are also following an ascendant trend (INS, 2001), which will, in the future, constitute an element of support for the implementation of such MBIs aimed at environmental protection.

 

It is not only the weakness of the green movements that results in a lower population’s awareness about environmental problems, but also the dominant religion in the present Romanian society, which is Orthodoxy, a Christian religion. Therefore, it is very obvious the anthropocentric nature of the thoughts and actions it proclaims. As White states, “Christianity is the most anthropocentric religion world has ever seen” (1967). Man is the most important inhabitant of the Earth and all the other living things are suppose to “serve” Homo sapiens. A brief example is more than suggestive. Recently the Romanian Patriarchy decided that a huge Cathedral of the Romanian Nation’s Salvation should be built in Bucharest; a place was looked up for the building, and the decision was to destroy one of the parks in Bucharest in order to build this cathedral (Cancelaria Sfantului Sinod, 2003; Catedrala Mantuirii Neamului, 2003). Nature is seen as having not necessarily “inherent or intrinsic value” (Miller, 2003. 744), but value for humans, an attitude that may diminish and even obstruct the influence of the newest ecocentric ideas that have begun to occur from the West.

Follow @sanatate