Liberals to Stamp Out 'Take Out'????

[Foxfyre]

Last night, I caught the tail end of a televised news cast--I don't even know what station I was on--but it was about a mom who packed a lunch for her preschooler somewhere back east--they probaby said but I didn't catch that either.

The gist of the story was that the mom packed some fresh finger veggies, fresh fruit, some kind of meat wrap--in other words a really healhy lunch for the kid. However, the regulations are that all food groups including a grain must be included in lunches if parents bypass the institutional kitchen and send a lunch with their kids. So. . . .to avoid the kid being malnourished, the school provided the grain by adding some RITZ CRACKERS!!!!! to the lunch--presumably as the grain. And the mother was fined $10 for violating the school policy.

I think this, while an isolated and anecdotal example, is the future of our country, folks, if we don't develop sufficient interest and backbone to put a stop to this before we lose all our individual liberties.

I don't care if they ban styropfoam for take out so long as there is an equally suitable and economical substitute that is readily available. McDonalds has been using those substitutes for decades now so it is entirely doable. It's just the idea that the people are losing our liberties, options, choices, and in some cases opportunities. It needs to stop.

 

[flacaltenn]

Unbelievably insane FoxFyre. Auditing lunches from home and FINING..

What's next? Monitoring sheets of toilet paper in the school bathroom?
((Don't tell me if this is already in place))

We treat kids in schools like INMATES nowadays. If I want to make a bagel, lox and cheese for my kid and forget to toss in a cucumber slice --- it's no one's biz..

I'd like to see them take my kids' egg roll apart and analyze the contents..

 

[Foxfyre]

Unbelievably insane FoxFyre. Auditing lunches from home and FINING..

What's next? Monitoring sheets of toilet paper in the school bathroom?
((Don't tell me if this is already in place))

We treat kids in schools like INMATES nowadays. If I want to make a bagel, lox and cheese for my kid and forget to toss in a cucumber slice --- it's no one's biz..

I'd like to see them take my kids' egg roll apart and analyze the contents..

Well being of a generation of school kids who grew up taking sack lunches to school, and suffering zero ill effects from that, I think parents should be applauded who do that for their kids. And unless we want to enter every kitchen in America to monitor and regulate what the parents are allowed to feed their kids at home, what moms pack in those lunches is really nobody's business. How screwed up is it when we subsidize and reward mothers who don't feed their kids at all--we feed the kids for them--and then criticize and/or punish a parent who IS feeding their kid because they aren't doing it according to some government guideline?

It is crazy.

 

[flacaltenn]

As far as the OP goes.. We were environmental SAINTS. Using those reusable, rusty metal lunch boxes with Yogi Bear on the lids..

Probably illegal now. Can't get thru the metal scanner at the door..

 

[Synthaholic]

When our NYC Mayor Bloomberg gets in touch with his Liberal side, well....he should have a drink, and lie down until it passes.


His latest caprice:


1. "... holding a hearing Monday on a bill to prohibit the use and sale of plastic foam cups and plates that have long been ubiquitous in delis, bodegas and even school cafeterias.

2. Sanitation officials say plastic foam food containers add 23,000 tons of trash a year to landfills, The city’s total total waste stream is more than three million tons.

3. ....officials say the ban is warranted because foam containers are non-biodegradable, can’t be recycled and spoil the environment.

4. Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio proposed a similar measure as public advocate in 2010, according to his office website.
Bloomberg’s office said the foam ban is a no-brainer.

5. “When polystyrene foam is used for food service it becomes a devastating pollutant that infects our parks and waterways while never biodegrading and has been classified a carcinogenic health hazard by the National Institute of Health,” said Bloomberg spokesman Jake Goldman."
Mayor Bloomberg wants to ban Styrofoam | New York Post





First, environmentalism is one of those pet projects of Liberals, based on lies and misinformation.





6. Ready for a lesson in eutrophication?

"...many hours learning the ins and outs of factors such as eutrophication, which is the degree to which paper or plastic bags disturb the chemical and nutritional balance of the earth's soil as they each sit in landfills or other burial spots. (Paper loses that part of the battle, because the process used to manufacture the bags emits considerably more carbon than the act of making a plastic bag.)

... neither paper nor plastic bags decompose to any useful degree in the landfills where most of our trash ends up."
Binary Man: Paper Or Plastic? - Raw Fisher
Binary Man: Paper Or Plastic? - Raw Fisher

a. "Sometimes, even banana peels don't decompose once they reach the landfill. For sanitary reasons, modern landfills are lined on the bottom with clay and plastic to keep waste from escaping into the soil and are covered daily with a layer of earth to reduce odor. The landfill, then, acts like a trash tomb—the garbage within receives little air, water, or sunlight. This means that even readily degradable waste objects, including paper and food scraps, are more likely to mummify than decompose."
Do plastic bags really take 500 years to break down in a landfill?





7. Strofoam a carcinogen?
Yeah....if you smoke it.

But before you toss those white plastic take-out containers, keep this in mind: the government report says that by far the greatest exposure to styrene comes from cigarette smoke. In fact, one study cited in the report estimates that exposure from smoking cigarettes was roughly 10 times that from all other sources, including indoor and outdoor air, drinking water, soil and food combined.
Chemical Found in Foam Cups a Possible Carcinogen - US News and World Report


BTW.....studies of styrofoam as a carcinogen are replete with the word 'possibly.'
Guess why?






8. Dr. Thomas Sowell, in “Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One,” challenges individuals to analyze not only their short term (Stage One) impact but to also think ahead to their long term (Stage Two, Three, etc) impact.

Politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.

Case in point the styrofoam ban: any thought to what the food industry would use instead?

Wanna carry out that Kung Pao Chicken in your hands?

You have two completely different subjects in this OP.

The first is the Styrofoam ban by Bloomberg, di Blasio, and other rational, responsible adults. It is an absolutely correct thing to do.

The second is the way we currently landfill, which I have no doubt doesn't lead to breakdown of organic waste. It's a terrible process.

The answer is to come up with a better way. There are already items made from plant starch, which break down rather quickly, harmless.

There is no reason to keep polluting with plastic utensils.

Not bad idea.. Doesn't solve the take-out prob completely..
Tell ya what --- I aint using no China made "plant starch" utensils.. They've already killed our pets by not being able to make dog food that's not toxic...

No, we would encourage the growth of a U.S. market.

 

[Synthaholic]

When our NYC Mayor Bloomberg gets in touch with his Liberal side, well....he should have a drink, and lie down until it passes.


His latest caprice:


1. "... holding a hearing Monday on a bill to prohibit the use and sale of plastic foam cups and plates that have long been ubiquitous in delis, bodegas and even school cafeterias.

2. Sanitation officials say plastic foam food containers add 23,000 tons of trash a year to landfills, The city’s total total waste stream is more than three million tons.

3. ....officials say the ban is warranted because foam containers are non-biodegradable, can’t be recycled and spoil the environment.

4. Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio proposed a similar measure as public advocate in 2010, according to his office website.
Bloomberg’s office said the foam ban is a no-brainer.

5. “When polystyrene foam is used for food service it becomes a devastating pollutant that infects our parks and waterways while never biodegrading and has been classified a carcinogenic health hazard by the National Institute of Health,” said Bloomberg spokesman Jake Goldman."
Mayor Bloomberg wants to ban Styrofoam | New York Post





First, environmentalism is one of those pet projects of Liberals, based on lies and misinformation.





6. Ready for a lesson in eutrophication?

"...many hours learning the ins and outs of factors such as eutrophication, which is the degree to which paper or plastic bags disturb the chemical and nutritional balance of the earth's soil as they each sit in landfills or other burial spots. (Paper loses that part of the battle, because the process used to manufacture the bags emits considerably more carbon than the act of making a plastic bag.)

... neither paper nor plastic bags decompose to any useful degree in the landfills where most of our trash ends up."
Binary Man: Paper Or Plastic? - Raw Fisher
Binary Man: Paper Or Plastic? - Raw Fisher

a. "Sometimes, even banana peels don't decompose once they reach the landfill. For sanitary reasons, modern landfills are lined on the bottom with clay and plastic to keep waste from escaping into the soil and are covered daily with a layer of earth to reduce odor. The landfill, then, acts like a trash tomb—the garbage within receives little air, water, or sunlight. This means that even readily degradable waste objects, including paper and food scraps, are more likely to mummify than decompose."
Do plastic bags really take 500 years to break down in a landfill?





7. Strofoam a carcinogen?
Yeah....if you smoke it.

But before you toss those white plastic take-out containers, keep this in mind: the government report says that by far the greatest exposure to styrene comes from cigarette smoke. In fact, one study cited in the report estimates that exposure from smoking cigarettes was roughly 10 times that from all other sources, including indoor and outdoor air, drinking water, soil and food combined.
Chemical Found in Foam Cups a Possible Carcinogen - US News and World Report


BTW.....studies of styrofoam as a carcinogen are replete with the word 'possibly.'
Guess why?






8. Dr. Thomas Sowell, in “Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One,” challenges individuals to analyze not only their short term (Stage One) impact but to also think ahead to their long term (Stage Two, Three, etc) impact.

Politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.

Case in point the styrofoam ban: any thought to what the food industry would use instead?

Wanna carry out that Kung Pao Chicken in your hands?

You have two completely different subjects in this OP.

The first is the Styrofoam ban by Bloomberg, di Blasio, and other rational, responsible adults. It is an absolutely correct thing to do.

The second is the way we currently landfill, which I have no doubt doesn't lead to breakdown of organic waste. It's a terrible process.

The answer is to come up with a better way. There are already items made from plant starch, which break down rather quickly, harmless.


Eco Products? 6.75" Plant Starch Spoons, Knives and Forks

There is no reason to keep polluting with plastic utensils.

"RALEIGH — To Raleigh's thinking, that holiday gift from your tree-hugger friend contains a hidden danger: biodegradable packing peanuts -- menace to plumbing pipes everywhere.

Raleigh's public utilities crew tested the popular corn-starch packaging and discovered that, contrary to the advertising, they do not dissolve in water.

"They actually required agitation," said Dale Crisp, the city's public utilities director. "We were stirring vigorously, and even when we did so overnight, they did not completely dissolve."

That means the eco-friendly peanuts can gum up the city's sewer lines when poured, flushed or dumped. The city suggests you save them to reuse instead, or drop them in the landfill to slowly trickle out of existence."
RALEIGH: Starchy packing peanuts flunk a flush test | Local/State | NewsObserver.com

What does that have to do with plant starch utensils that break down harmlessly?

 

[Sunshine]

Isnt this the same mayor that was handing out truckloads of free styrofoam laden bike helmets to folks who will probably never use them a couple years ago? Brain cancer?

I think the answer is banana leaves.. All the Mu Shoo you can fit in a banana leaf.. AND mandatory composting.. No alleyway is too small for a compost pile...

Well....with that idea in mind.....

.....I recall several years ago a truck would drive around selling Chinese food.
The plates they used to serve it was a huge square noodle with a concave middle.

And that 'plate' was delicious!

Problem solved....

The bowl of a taco salad is edible, but I wouldn't really care to drink coffee from it!

 

[PoliticalChic]

You have two completely different subjects in this OP.

The first is the Styrofoam ban by Bloomberg, di Blasio, and other rational, responsible adults. It is an absolutely correct thing to do.

The second is the way we currently landfill, which I have no doubt doesn't lead to breakdown of organic waste. It's a terrible process.

The answer is to come up with a better way. There are already items made from plant starch, which break down rather quickly, harmless.


Eco Products? 6.75" Plant Starch Spoons, Knives and Forks

There is no reason to keep polluting with plastic utensils.

"RALEIGH — To Raleigh's thinking, that holiday gift from your tree-hugger friend contains a hidden danger: biodegradable packing peanuts -- menace to plumbing pipes everywhere.

Raleigh's public utilities crew tested the popular corn-starch packaging and discovered that, contrary to the advertising, they do not dissolve in water.

"They actually required agitation," said Dale Crisp, the city's public utilities director. "We were stirring vigorously, and even when we did so overnight, they did not completely dissolve."

That means the eco-friendly peanuts can gum up the city's sewer lines when poured, flushed or dumped. The city suggests you save them to reuse instead, or drop them in the landfill to slowly trickle out of existence."
RALEIGH: Starchy packing peanuts flunk a flush test | Local/State | NewsObserver.com

What does that have to do with plant starch utensils that break down harmlessly?

They don't.

"... corn-starch packaging and discovered that, contrary to the advertising, they do not dissolve in water."

 

[Abraham3]

Incredible.

Styrofoam can be replaced with paper products and newer biodegradables.

If anyone in this discussion deserves to have 23,000 tons of styrofoam dumped in their front yard, it would be poster PoliticalChic. I have never in my life met someone who appears to be as ecologically irresponsible. Her(?) commentary is so unreasonable it makes me suspect she is actually trolling.

BTW, before implying that styrofoam waste is insignificant because it only makes up 23,000 or 3 million tons, one might look at the obvious. The volume of 23,000 tons of styrofoam is 18,400,000 cubic feet. That would be a cube 264 feet on a side. That would be roughly one third the volume of one of the World Trade Center Towers. Every year.

Now just for comparison purposes, let's estimate that trash has the same density as water (since it's routinely dumped at sea, that's being conservative). Three million tons of water has a volume of 96,154,000 cubic feet.

So, athough the styrofoam makes up less than 8 ten-thousandths of the waste's mass, it makes up almost one-fifth of it's volume. Successfully reducing the waste volume of a major urban area by 20% would have an enormous impact.

So who cares? I do. Who doesn't? PoliticalChic. She seems to be content to lie in her own waste, so to speak.

 

[Abraham3]

"RALEIGH — To Raleigh's thinking, that holiday gift from your tree-hugger friend contains a hidden danger: biodegradable packing peanuts -- menace to plumbing pipes everywhere.

Raleigh's public utilities crew tested the popular corn-starch packaging and discovered that, contrary to the advertising, they do not dissolve in water.

"They actually required agitation," said Dale Crisp, the city's public utilities director. "We were stirring vigorously, and even when we did so overnight, they did not completely dissolve."

That means the eco-friendly peanuts can gum up the city's sewer lines when poured, flushed or dumped. The city suggests you save them to reuse instead, or drop them in the landfill to slowly trickle out of existence."
RALEIGH: Starchy packing peanuts flunk a flush test | Local/State | NewsObserver.com

What does that have to do with plant starch utensils that break down harmlessly?

They don't.

"... corn-starch packaging and discovered that, contrary to the advertising, they do not dissolve in water."

Who has ever recommended that biodegradable packing peanuts be flushed?

 

[Abraham3]

BTW:

EUTROPHICATION: Ecology . (of a lake) characterized by an abundant accumulation of nutrients that support a dense growth of algae and other organisms, the decay of which depletes the shallow waters of oxygen in summer.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Incredible.

Styrofoam can be replaced with paper products and newer biodegradables.

If anyone in this discussion deserves to have 23,000 tons of styrofoam dumped in their front yard, it would be poster PoliticalChic. I have never in my life met someone who appears to be as ecologically irresponsible. Her(?) commentary is so unreasonable it makes me suspect she is actually trolling.

BTW, before implying that styrofoam waste is insignificant because it only makes up 23,000 or 3 million tons, one might look at the obvious. The volume of 23,000 tons of styrofoam is 18,400,000 cubic feet. That would be a cube 264 feet on a side. That would be roughly one third the volume of one of the World Trade Center Towers. Every year.

Now just for comparison purposes, let's estimate that trash has the same density as water (since it's routinely dumped at sea, that's being conservative). Three million tons of water has a volume of 96,154,000 cubic feet.

So, athough the styrofoam makes up less than 8 ten-thousandths of the waste's mass, it makes up almost one-fifth of it's volume. Successfully reducing the waste volume of a major urban area by 20% would have an enormous impact.

So who cares? I do. Who doesn't? PoliticalChic. She seems to be content to lie in her own waste, so to speak.

Seems you are ignorant of the subject about which you'd like to appear knowledgeable.


"Styrofoam can be replaced with paper products and newer biodegradables."


Nothing biodegrades.


" Myth:Biodegradable products are the preferred environmental solution because waste simply biodegrades in the landfill.
Reality:Nothing biodegrades in a landfill because nothing is supposed to."
Biodegradable Products Institute - Biodegradation Myths


What to do with a nation filled with simpletons like you who march to the pitter patter of Liberal bumper-stickers.


Sorry for the mixed metaphor.



Here is a bumper-sticker that applies to folks like you:
“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

Sad for the nation, isn't it.

 

[Katzndogz]

They do have disposable containers made out of corn. They are just very expensive.

 

[Foxfyre]

Since styrofoam is not at all biodegradable, but is such a wonderful, useful, functional and affordable product, I would like to see more emphasis finding a way to efficiently and economically recycle it. Right now most city recycling programs don't include styrofoam, but there is at least one company out there that does recycle it. If they streamline and make the process efficient and cost effective, problem solved.

 

[Abraham3]

Nothing biodegrades.
" Myth:Biodegradable products are the preferred environmental solution because waste simply biodegrades in the landfill.
Reality:Nothing biodegrades in a landfill because nothing is supposed to."
Biodegradable Products Institute - Biodegradation Myths

Did you read your own link?

In the 1991 book Rubbish!: The Archaeology of Garbage, Dr. William Rathje William Rathje's Book Rubbishof the University of Arizon summarized his innovative techniques of excavating modern landfills as a method of observing human social activities. Among his findings: the dry and oxygen-poor conditions found in modern landfills cause organic matter to mummify rather than decompose.

This fact is actually preferred since uncontrolled biodegradation in a landfill can cause ground water pollution, methane gas emissions, and unstable sub-soil conditions. As a result, modern landfills are kept dry and air-tight to prevent biodegradation. Read the EPA website page on modern landfill design.

This fact sheet from Environment Industry Plastics Council (Canada) also gives an excellent overview about why biodegradation in landfills is not a solution.

Composting, on the other hand, is the process of controlled biodegradation outside a landfill.

By carefully controlling the feedstocks (source-separated, mixed organics), and controlling the process (moisture content, oxygen levels), composters transform biogegradable materials into useful products that are used in farming, gardening and soil conservation.

Today, despite national progress on yard waste composting, more than 60 million tons of biodegradable materials (food scraps, wet & soiled paper, leaves and grass) are still being sent to landfills where they will sit in an airless, dry environment to be mummified.

The phrase biodegradable, like recyclable, merely describes the composition of a product. Its potential, not its inherent value. If a product is sent to a landfill, and not disposed of properly in a municipal composting or recycling facility, it is still part of the problem no matter what it's made from.
**********************************************************************
So, things DO biodegrade but they can be prevented from doing so if that's what's desired. Now, from the EPA link concerning landfills included in the quote above:

Modern landfills are well-engineered facilities that are located, designed, operated, and monitored to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Solid waste landfills must be designed to protect the environment from contaminants which may be present in the solid waste stream. The landfill siting plan—which prevents the siting of landfills in environmentally-sensitive areas—as well as on-site environmental monitoring systems—which monitor for any sign of groundwater contamination and for landfill gas—provide additional safeguards. In addition, many new landfills collect potentially harmful landfill gas emissions and convert the gas into energy. For more information, visit EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program.
***********************************************************************
Where do you think the methane comes from?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nothing biodegrades.
" Myth:Biodegradable products are the preferred environmental solution because waste simply biodegrades in the landfill.
Reality:Nothing biodegrades in a landfill because nothing is supposed to."
Biodegradable Products Institute - Biodegradation Myths

Did you read your own link?

In the 1991 book Rubbish!: The Archaeology of Garbage, Dr. William Rathje William Rathje's Book Rubbishof the University of Arizon summarized his innovative techniques of excavating modern landfills as a method of observing human social activities. Among his findings: the dry and oxygen-poor conditions found in modern landfills cause organic matter to mummify rather than decompose.

This fact is actually preferred since uncontrolled biodegradation in a landfill can cause ground water pollution, methane gas emissions, and unstable sub-soil conditions. As a result, modern landfills are kept dry and air-tight to prevent biodegradation. Read the EPA website page on modern landfill design.

This fact sheet from Environment Industry Plastics Council (Canada) also gives an excellent overview about why biodegradation in landfills is not a solution.

Composting, on the other hand, is the process of controlled biodegradation outside a landfill.

By carefully controlling the feedstocks (source-separated, mixed organics), and controlling the process (moisture content, oxygen levels), composters transform biogegradable materials into useful products that are used in farming, gardening and soil conservation.

Today, despite national progress on yard waste composting, more than 60 million tons of biodegradable materials (food scraps, wet & soiled paper, leaves and grass) are still being sent to landfills where they will sit in an airless, dry environment to be mummified.

The phrase biodegradable, like recyclable, merely describes the composition of a product. Its potential, not its inherent value. If a product is sent to a landfill, and not disposed of properly in a municipal composting or recycling facility, it is still part of the problem no matter what it's made from.
**********************************************************************
So, things DO biodegrade but they can be prevented from doing so if that's what's desired. Now, from the EPA link concerning landfills included in the quote above:

Modern landfills are well-engineered facilities that are located, designed, operated, and monitored to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Solid waste landfills must be designed to protect the environment from contaminants which may be present in the solid waste stream. The landfill siting plan—which prevents the siting of landfills in environmentally-sensitive areas—as well as on-site environmental monitoring systems—which monitor for any sign of groundwater contamination and for landfill gas—provide additional safeguards. In addition, many new landfills collect potentially harmful landfill gas emissions and convert the gas into energy. For more information, visit EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program.
***********************************************************************
Where do you think the methane comes from?

You don't really want me to make a personal comment about you to answer that, do you?




" Among his findings: the dry and oxygen-poor conditions found in modern landfills cause organic matter to mummify rather than decompose."

So I was correct: nothing decomposes in landfills.


And, yes...I read your baloney quote....'landfill siting plan' and 'many new landfills.'

 

[Abraham3]

But that isn't what you said. You quoted, without comment, a line that read simply "Nothing biodegrades". That statement is completely false.

 

[PoliticalChic]

But that isn't what you said. You quoted, without comment, a line that read simply "Nothing biodegrades". That statement is completely false.

Hardly.

The discussion referred to land fills and paper plates.


Did you forget that?


Isn't it amusing how many of the things you fervently believe, actually have no basis in fact?

 

[Abraham3]

Incredible.

Styrofoam can be replaced with paper products and newer biodegradables.

If anyone in this discussion deserves to have 23,000 tons of styrofoam dumped in their front yard, it would be poster PoliticalChic. I have never in my life met someone who appears to be as ecologically irresponsible. Her(?) commentary is so unreasonable it makes me suspect she is actually trolling.

BTW, before implying that styrofoam waste is insignificant because it only makes up 23,000 or 3 million tons, one might look at the obvious. The volume of 23,000 tons of styrofoam is 18,400,000 cubic feet. That would be a cube 264 feet on a side. That would be roughly one third the volume of one of the World Trade Center Towers. Every year.

Now just for comparison purposes, let's estimate that trash has the same density as water (since it's routinely dumped at sea, that's being conservative). Three million tons of water has a volume of 96,154,000 cubic feet.

So, athough the styrofoam makes up less than 8 ten-thousandths of the waste's mass, it makes up almost one-fifth of it's volume. Successfully reducing the waste volume of a major urban area by 20% would have an enormous impact.

So who cares? I do. Who doesn't? PoliticalChic. She seems to be content to lie in her own waste, so to speak.

Seems you are ignorant of the subject about which you'd like to appear knowledgeable.


"Styrofoam can be replaced with paper products and newer biodegradables."


Nothing biodegrades.


" Myth:Biodegradable products are the preferred environmental solution because waste simply biodegrades in the landfill.
Reality:Nothing biodegrades in a landfill because nothing is supposed to."
Biodegradable Products Institute - Biodegradation Myths


What to do with a nation filled with simpletons like you who march to the pitter patter of Liberal bumper-stickers.


Sorry for the mixed metaphor.



Here is a bumper-sticker that applies to folks like you:
“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

Sad for the nation, isn't it.

I was wrong on one point. You don't seem to be quoting anyone. The statement is yours and yours alone.

 

[mamooth]

I get styrofoam trash washing up along my creek, though plastic bags are the most common thing.

Now, I'm happy to clean it up myself, seeing it as a civic duty. It's a liberal thing, helping the community. However, the libertarians inform me that I have the right, nay, the duty, to sue someone to get compensation for my labor, as that's how environmental problems are always supposed to be solved. There must be lawyers involved and lawsuits filed; it's the libertarian way.

So, who do I sue?