CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

April 3, 1969

Page 8608

SENATE RESOLUTION 179 -- RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE UNITED STATES SHOULD ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN AND OFFER TO ACT AS HOST TO THE 1972 UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on December 3, 1968, the United States joined with Sweden and 49 other member nations of the United Nations in supporting a resolution to convene, not later than 1972, an international conference on the human environment. Sweden and her able representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Astrom, are to be commended for taking the initiative in proposing this international conference, and for their offer to act as the host country,

The world is facing an environmental crisis of constantly increasing proportions, and nothing short of an international effort can hold out any real hope for mankind in the face of that crisis.

The earth is only so large; it will not grow. Three and one-half billion people are in effect riding a spaceship -- the earth. We are converting material and energy for our use, and generating wastes in the process. The total environment of the world -- the rivers, the lakes, the land, and the atmosphere -- is burdened with the by-products of our consuming society. As a result, the delicate ecological balance on which our survival depends is in serious danger of being upset.

No nation can afford to consider its environment as though it were a private preserve. History has convinced us that peace and freedom are secure only when they are universal, and the quality of our environment demands the same perspective.

The nations of the world must develop ecological consciences, an awareness that we are all a part of a single ecosystem developed over eons of time. Our alteration of that ecosystem puts a heavy responsibility on man to manage the quality of the environment to assure his own survival and the survival of those other species essential to life on earth.

As the world's most highly industrialized nation, the United States has been guilty of environmental mismanagement, but we have developed significant programs to control and abate the degradation of our environment. We bear a special responsibility to exercise world leadership in this area.

The resolution which I introduce today authorizes the State Department to pledge the full support and participation of the United States in accomplishing the conference objectives.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the resolution, the United Nations' resolution, Ambassador Wiggins statement of December 3, 1968, and Ambassador Astrom's statement of July 19, 1968, be inserted in the RECORD at this point.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The resolution will be received and appropriately referred, and without objection, the resolution, and statements will be printed in the RECORD.

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, as follows:

S. RES. 179

Whereas air and water pollution, erosion, and other forms of soil deterioration, waste, noise, and the secondary effects of biocides greatly endanger the quality of the human environment;

Whereas the problems of human environment respect no international boundaries and are cause for the concern of all people;

Whereas the world's increasing population and accelerating urbanization continually enlarge the dimensions of the problems concerning human environment;

Whereas the United States, as the world's most highly industrialized and developed nation, suffers most acutely from problems affecting the human environment, has taken initial steps to deal with them, and bears a special responsibility to exercise world leadership in developing methods of preserving environmental quality;

Whereas the world community, and the developing countries in particular, can benefit from a sharing among the various nations of the experience and knowledge acquired about environmental problems and their solutions;

Whereas intensified action and cooperation among nations is clearly necessary to preserve and protect mankind against dangers to his environment;

Whereas the Twenty-Third Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, on December 6, 1968, in recognition of the urgent need for international cooperation in solving the problems of human environment, adopted Resolution 2398 (XXIII) which provides for the convening in 1972 of a United Nations Conference on Human Environment: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the United States should actively support and participate in such Conference, and should undertake such preparation as may be necessary to enable the United States so to participate and otherwise to maximize its contribution to such Conference and the activities thereof.

The material, presented by Mr. MUSKIE, follows:

TEXT OF U.N. RESOLUTION'

THE PROBLEMS OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

The General Assembly,

Noting that the relationship between man and his environment is undergoing profound changes in the wake of modern scientific and technological developments,

Aware that these developments, while offering unprecedented opportunities to change and shape the environment of man to meet his needs and aspirations, also involve grave dangers if not properly controlled,

Noting, in particular, the continuing and accelerating impairment of the quality of the human environment caused by such factors as air and water pollution, erosion and other forms of soil deterioration, waste, noise and the secondary effects of biocides, which are accentuated by rapidly increasing population and accelerating urbanization,

Concerned about the consequent effects on the condition of man, his physical, mental and social well-being, his dignity and his enjoyment of basic human rights, in developing as well as developed countries,

Convinced that increased attention to problems of the human environment is essential for sound economic and social development,

Expressing the strong hope that the developing countries will, through appropriate international co-operation, derive particular benefit from the mobilization of knowledge and experience about the problems of human environment, enabling them, inter alia, to forestall the occurrence of many such problems,

Having considered Economic and Social Council resolution 1346 (XIV) of 30 July 1968 on the question of convening an international conference on the problems of human environment,

Bearing in mind the important work on some problems of the human environment at present being undertaken by organizations in the United Nations system, in particular the United Nations (including the Economic Commission for Europe), the International Labour Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organization, the World Meteorological Organization, the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency, as referred to in the report of the Secretary General on activities of United Nations organizations and programmes relevant to the human environment,

Aware of the important work being done on problems of the human environment by Governments as well as by intergovernmental organizations such as the Organization of African Unity and non-governmental organizations such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, the International Council of Scientific Unions and the International Biological Programme,

Bearing in mind the recommendations of the Intergovernmental Conference of Experts on the Scientific Basis for Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere , convened by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural organization, with the participation of the United Nations, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization,

Convinced of the need for intensified action at the national, regional and international level in order to limit and, where possible, eliminate the impairment of the human environment and in order to protect and improve the natural surroundings in the interest of man,

Desiring to encourage further work in this field and to give it a common outlook and direction,

Believing it desirable to provide a framework for comprehensive consideration within the United Nations of the problems of human environment in order to focus the attention of Governments and public opinion on the importance and urgency of this question and also to identify those aspects of it that can only or best be solved through international co-operation and agreement,

1. Decides, in furtherance of the objectives set out above, to convene in 1972 a United Nations Conference on Human Environment;

2. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology to Develop, to submit to the General Assembly at its twenty-fourth session, through the Economic and Social Council at its forty-seventh session, a report concerning

(a) The nature, scope and progress of work at present being done in the field of human environment;

(b) The main problems facing developed and developing countries in this area, which might with particular advantage be considered at such a conference, including the possibilities for increased international cooperation, especially as they relate to economic and social development, in particular of the developing countries;

(c) Possible methods of preparing for the Conference and the time necessary for such preparations;

(d) A possible time and place for the Conference;

(e) The range of financial implications for the United Nations of the holding of the Conference;

3. Further requests the Secretary-General, in preparing the report, to consult Governments of States Members of the United Nations and members of the specialized agencies and of the International Atomic Energy Agency and appropriate organizations of the United Nations system, and to draw on contributions from appropriate intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations.

UNITED STATES JOINS IN PROPOSING 1972 U.N. CONFERENCE ON THE PROBLEMS OF THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

(Statement by Ambassador Wiggins)

(NOTE--Following is a statement by James Russell Wiggins, U.S. Representative to the General Assembly, made in plenary session on December 3, together with the text of a resolution adopted by the Assembly that day.)

The United States is privileged to join with Sweden and 49 other nations in a resolution to convoke, not later than 1972, an international conference on the problems of the human environment. We join in this proposal with a deep sense of the importance of this subject for every nation, and with admiration for the initiative of Sweden and her able representative, Ambassador Astrom.

The evidence of mankind's gathering environmental crisis does not have to be sought in books or in scholarly documents. City dwellers on every continent of this crowded earth see it, hear it, smell it, absorb it, and suffer from it.

It is in our air -- filled with the noxious fumes of factories, furnaces, builders, wreckers, trains, trucks, buses, boats, aircraft, and automobiles by the scores of millions.

It is in our lakes and rivers -- suffocated by fertilizers that drain from our farmlands and polluted by an ever-growing flood of industrial, agricultural, and chemical wastes.

It is on our land -- more and more of which is buried under the encroaching megalopolis or poisoned by pesticides or wounded by strip mining and timber cutting or strewn with the ugly rubbish of our fabulous productivity.

Despite tardy efforts to relieve these conditions, they pose a rising threat to human well-being in every nation and community, at whatever stage of development.

In the last century, a mere tick on the celestial clock, we have loosed upon the earth such a mass of humanity and such a torrent of energy as to transform much of it beyond recognition. For the first time, we are brought face to face with the stark facts that space upon this planet is finite, that the resources of this planet are exhaustible and not easily renewed. We are made aware that by his sheer numbers and his heedless ingenuity man can injure his environment so as to hasten his own extinction. We have not much time left in which to learn to proportion our population to available resources and to become good enough trustees of our inherited wealth of air, water, earth, and forms of life so that our posterity may hope to survive in a condition better than bestial struggle.

THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE

The United States, as a highly industrialized nation, is well acquainted with these environmental problems and has begun, however belatedly, to mobilize considerable efforts to attack them. It may be useful for me to give a few examples, not forgetting that our American problems are but illustrations of a world problem.

The extent of a people's capacity to transform their environment, for better or for worse, corresponds very closely with the amount of energy they consume. Since the middle of the 19th century, while the population of the United States has multiplied ninefold, this nation's consumption of energy has multiplied by about 25. It is still increasing and at an accelerating rate; in less than 20 years it will be half again what it is now. This rising expenditure of energy has brought our people many good results. It has relieved us of backbreaking drudgery, given us undreamed-of creature comforts, lengthened our lives and brightened them with books, pictures, music, travel, and recreation. But along with these blessings, a host of unintended and unwanted by-products have made the word "pollution" a part of our daily vocabulary.

Every year in the United States 142 million tons of smoke and noxious fumes, over 1,400 pounds per capita, are dumped into the atmosphere.

Every year this nation discards 7 million automobiles, 20 million tons of paper, 48 billion cans, 26 billion bottles and jars. Much of this material, made of aluminum and plastics, is virtually proof against decay. One wonders what archeologists of some future age will think of us when they dig these things up.

Every year the American mining industry discards more than 3 billion tons of waste rock and mill tailings.

Every year American lakes, rivers, and estuaries receive some 50 trillion gallons of hot water, used for cooling by the power industry, and unknown millions of tons of organic and chemical pollutants from our cities, farms, and industrial plants.

POLLUTION OF LAKES AND STREAMS

A brief glance into American history reminds us of what a change we have wrought in our natural environment, especially our waters.

The Hudson River, which our Secretary General can see as he looks west from his office window, was described by Henry Hudson, who first saw it in 1609, as "clear, blue and wonderful to the taste." In colonial days salmon were plentiful. A hundred years ago giant sea sturgeon were caught and stacked like cordwood on Hudson River wharfs, and their caviar, not yet popular in this country, was exported by the ton to Russia. Ten to twenty million pounds of oysters were harvested in the lower Hudson as late as 1880.

Today most of the lower Hudson, from Albany to the sea, is so polluted with the wastes of cities and factories that it is unfit for drinking or swimming and of little value for fishing or even boating. Oysters and clams have virtually disappeared. The worst stretches of the river have been described in such phrases as "a torrent of filth" and "one great septic tank." It will take a billion dollars and a 10-year program, only now getting underway, to restore this beautiful river. The Hudson, by the way, originates in the Adirondack Mountains in a lake called Tear of the Clouds. No wonder the clouds weep.

Other American rivers, with far less concentration of population and industry upon their shores, have also sunk into degradation.

When Captain John Smith, one of the earliest Virginia settlers, first saw the Potomac River, its waters were so clear that he could see the bottom in several fathoms. He described it as "fed with many sweet rivers and springs" and frequented by otter, beavers, martens and sables, and fish so thick that he and his men attempted to catch them in a frying pan. He wrote: "Neither better fish, more plenty or variety, had any of us ever seen in any place."

A description of that same Potomac 350 years later appears in a recent report of the President's Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty:

"As the Potomac slowly flows through the nation's Capital, its load of silt, filth and acid from farms, mills and mines blends with discharge from overloaded sewers to nourish an algae bloom and a summer stink that rises from the river for miles below the metropolis"

There again, a long and costly program of rehabilitation will be required before the river is restored to health.

A similar story can be told about the pollution of Lake Erie, the Mississippi, the Androscoggin, and hundreds of other American lakes and streams.

POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS IN THE UNITED STATES

Such is the dark side of the story in America. There is a bright side, or brightening at any rate. In the past few years, the United States has seen a rapid acceleration of programs of conservation and pollution control at many levels of government and in private industry as well. The Federal Government has embarked on a 5-year, $3.5 billion program to help cities build modern sewage treatment plants. New York State voted 2 years ago to raise a billion dollars to clean up the State's rivers.

New York City alone plans to invest $2 billion in the next 10 years for clean air, clean water, and clean streets. Within 5 years it plans to complete its system of modern sewage treatment for the 1.3 billion gallons of the city's dally water supply. This will improve the waters around the city enough to open miles of new city beaches to public recreation.

In the fight on air pollution, city after city has tightened its regulations. New York City power plants have drastically reduced the sulfur content of their fuels. A month ago this city began operating a computerized air monitoring system to warn against pollution crises and to gather knowledge for better controls. All such efforts are aided by nationwide limits, now being set by the Federal Government, on the amounts of harmful exhaust which new automobiles may emit, beginning with 1968 models and due to be further tightened by 1970.

American private industry also is spending increasing amounts to control pollution. Its controls on air pollution alone are estimated to cost $800 million a year. The American oil industry is spending $382 million in 1968 to combat water pollution.

Even these figures are small compared with probable investment in all forms of pollution control in the United States over the coming decades -- a figure which has been estimated at well over $200 billion.

Our remedies are still several jumps behind the problem; in some cases we seem to be gaining on it; but we still have a long, long way to go, and there is much that we have yet to learn.

A WORLD CONCERN

Mr. President, I have cited these facts about the United States not because they are unique but rather because they are typical of the environmental predicament of every industrial society, especially those in a stage of rapid growth.

Pollution is no respecter of nations, cultures, or economic systems. Consider Lake Baikal, that almost sacred lake among the virgin pine and larch forests of Soviet Siberia, 420 miles long and the oldest and deepest body of fresh water on earth. The crystal pure waters of Baikal contain a thousand species of plants and animals known nowhere else. It is famous the world over as a unique laboratory for the botanist, zoologist, and student of evolution. Over a year ago, despite protests from scientists in the U.S.S.R. and abroad, pulpmills began to discharge their sulfurous effluents into the waters of the lake. Similar pollution problems afflict other waters in the Soviet Union, such as the Angara River, with its vast electric power and manufacturing complex, and the sturgeon fisheries on the Volga River and the shores of the Caspian Sea.

In the heart of Western Europe, the story is much the same. There is no more sorrowful victim of industrial progress than the fabled River Rhine -- that "valley of sweet waters" of which Lord Byron sang a century and a half ago. The Rhine in recent decades has had to struggle ever harder against the industrial wastes of the Ruhr, which have turned some of its tributaries into open sewers. 

The prevalence of such conditions in industrial areas has, fortunately, not gone unnoticed by the developing nations. Their growing concern for problems of the human environment has been manifested in many ways -- among others, by the large number of such nations that are cosponsors of the present resolution in this Assembly.

As we approach the second Decade of Development, these nations wisely desire to achieve the benefits of development at the least cost in damage to their natural environment. They can well take warning from the past mistakes of other countries, including my own.

The universality of these conditions is one reason why pollution of the human environment has become a world problem calling for the concerted efforts of the world community.

POLLUTION CROSSES BOUNDARIES

But there is another reason. Our cities, industries, and farms operate on such a scale that their physical environment is literally the whole planet, with its all-encircling ocean of both air and water. Man-made pollution crosses every boundary, riding the wind and rain, the rivers and ocean currents, the bodies of migrating fish and birds.

The Conference on the Human Environment is sure to have high on its agenda such global pollution problems.

What, for example, are we going to do about long-lasting pesticides, such as DDT, which are sprayed on crops at a rate of over 100 million pounds a year? Minute concentrations of them can be lethal to fish and birds and to the ocean plankton which are a vital link in the chain of life. DDT has been detected in places as remote as Antarctica. How can we prevent a rising level of such pollutants throughout the world?

What are we going to do about the rapidly rising quantities of inorganic nitrogen fertilizer which drain from the farmlands of the world into lakes, rivers, and estuaries and which combine with urban sewage to rob these waters of their oxygen and their ability to support life? How can this pollution be curbed without hampering the worldwide effort to grow more food?

What are we going to do to prevent contamination by radioactive wastes from the growing number of nuclear power stations throughout the world? In the present generation, for the first time since the world began, all of us have been exposed to manmade sources of radiation whose effects are still not fully known.

What steps should we take to preserve the immense diversity of the earth's plant and animal species? It is this diversity that gives stability to the intricate balance of living nature in every environment. In the industrial century just past, over 70 species of mammals alone have been exterminated -- more than in the previous 2,000 years. Today some 100 other animals species face the same danger.

What are we going to do about the accidental spilling of oil from tankers and other ships? Since the Torrey Canyon disaster of 1967, there has been some advance in methods of combating this menace. But such accidents continue to occur with devastating effects. And with the giant tankers of yesterday being dwarfed by the 300,000-ton monsters now coming off the ways, the potential for future disasters is great.

And what are we going to do about the steadily rising burden of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere? Already in the past 100 years, since fossil fuels began to be burned in huge quantities, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased close to 10 percent. This increase will probably total about 25 percent by the year 2000, given the rapidly accelerating rate of fuel consumption. Will the resulting "greenhouse" effect cause a permanent warming of the earth's climate, and perhaps even a rise in the world sea level as the polar icecaps melt? No one is sure, though much of human destiny could depend on the answer.

One could mention many other problems common to industrial nations which will surely be considered by the Conference on the Human Environment, such as the safe and economical disposal of solid wastes; the preservation of forests and groundcover, whose loss has been a prime cause of catastrophic floods in many lands: the ever-rising clamor of noise that surrounds our cities, our factories, our highways and airports the world over; and not least important, the education of our children to respect and defend their environment -- for without the support of public opinion nothing enduring can be achieved.

In this discussion I have sought to concentrate on the concrete and practical. But when we speak of the threat to our natural environment, we inevitably think also of a threat to our minds and spirits. As one Soviet conservationist, Miss V. Sagalova, recently wrote: "It is impermissible to consider forests only as a source of timber." In much the same vein our United States Supreme Court said a year ago in deciding against a proposed dam project: "A river is more than an amenity, it is a treasure."

It would be tragic indeed if man, in exchange for his fabulous power to mine and manipulate his environment for particular technical ends, should lose his more ancient power to relate to that same environment, to feel his primeval kinship with it, to wonder at it, and draw strength and solace from it. This power is deep in our nature. We are incomplete if we do not express it. One American naturalist, Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, believes that in today's industrial-urban civilization "man is building his own zoo," a cage that cramps his nature as surely as the bear's nature is cramped as he paces behind the bars. I do not think it sentimentalism to include this among the unintended ill effects of our dazzling industrial progress.

STEPS TOWARD A SOLUTION

Mr. President, experience tells us that our manifold environmental problems are not going to be solved automatically by any economic system, whether that of the free market or that of the state planner. The hope for their solution lies in our own purposeful decisions to uphold, even at considerable cost, certain values that we cherish, such as respect for the beauty and vulnerability of our earthly surroundings and a provident regard for our posterity. These values can find effective expression only in the collaboration of natural and social scientists, governments, businessmen, engineers, and good citizens; people with the requisite knowledge and the requisite power to decide, mobilize, organize, and lead. To raise the efforts of all these people to a sufficient level and to organize them on a world scale will be the purpose of the Conference on the Human Environment.

Fortunately, there is already a momentum of action by many international bodies which bodes well for the conference 4 years hence. Ambassador Astrom ably described many of these actions by both governmental and scientific organizations in his address here this morning. It was these accelerating activities that led up to Sweden's initiative in the Economic and Social Council last July and hence to the draft resolution that now lies before this Assembly.

All this takes place at a time of rapid growth in the science and technology of environmental improvement. There is thus an increasing reservoir of knowledge and experience in many countries on which the proposed conference can draw. The conference should be able to bring to many nations a better knowledge of the processes of change in our living environment and the best, and cheapest means of preventing its deterioration.

It should strengthen efforts to regenerate those environments already seriously impaired and, what is equally important, forestall the depredations that await the natural environments of those lands only now entering upon industrial development.

Indeed, let us all hope that governments will not wait for the conference of 1972 before taking energetic action to relieve and repair the wounds we have inflicted on nature and on ourselves.

All in authority, surely, should act without delay to apply the correctives that are already known.

The period between now and 1972 should be one of ferment, not only of preparation for the conference but of practical action in every field: new scientific work, technical and administrative development, training of qualified manpower, public education, and political decision.

Mr. President, I believe that the environmental problems we now ask the General Assembly to consider will appear, in the perspective of years, as of incomparably greater importance to the human species than those political dissensions to which, because they arouse such dangerous passion, we must devote such a great part of our days and nights at the United Nations. As one contemplates the future that will be in store for all the children of men if society does not address itself to these problems, one is struck by the irrelevance of many of the issues, that have for so long engaged our close attention.

One morning recently, just at dawn, I stood at the window of the American Embassy on the 42d floor of the Waldorf looking eastward toward the rising sun, which lifted slowly above a great bank of cloud and smog. I thought of how the river and the land and the sky must have looked when Western man first came to these shores and how everything had changed. As I watched in gloomy contemplation, a great plane traversed the now brightening sky above the cloud bank.

Then a morning breeze stirring in those high altitudes began to twist the vapor trails that it left behind until they slowly formed themselves into a vast interrogation point in the eastern heavens.

And I know the question that was asked in the skies. It was: "Can man on this planet survive his own fecundity and his own folly?" That is the question, Mr. President, and the time is at hand when the nations of the earth must answer it.

STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR SVERKER ASTROM, ON THE QUESTION OF CONVENING AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE PROBLEMS OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

We are now embarking on a debate which, by any reckoning, must be considered an important one. The quality of human environment is a matter of direct importance to all human beings. The air we breathe, the water we drink or use for various industrial purposes, the soil from which we draw our sustenance of life, the oceans which are the repositories of living organisms which produce food and oxygen, are the components of our environment. Their interaction determines the conditions of life on this planet of ours.

It is a hard and frightening fact that all these components, due to many factors, most of which have to do with rapid industrialization and urbanization, are undergoing deterioration on an ever increasing scale and at an ever accelerating rate. At the same time the need is growing to plan ahead, to try to avoid in the future the mistakes in the past which have made so much of our present environment unhealthy, unpleasant or ugly and which threaten, if not corrected in time, the well-being, the progress and, ultimately, the survival of man.

This is the first time that one of the principal organs of the United Nations tries to come to grips with this problem which, together with the necessity of rapid economic and social development, must be viewed as one of the compelling issues of our time. Indeed, these two are interrelated, inasmuch as due attention to the quality of environment is a prerequisite of sound economic and social development.

It may be said that human environment is too vague and too general a concept to allow for a comprehensive and cohesive discussion. We do not feel that this is so, and I will briefly indicate why.

History can be seen, from one aspect, as a process of continuous interaction between man and his physical environment. By using the natural resources around him, man changes his environment in order to improve his conditions of life. Many of the changes are lasting achievements which benefit everybody. Others are of short-term advantage, perhaps only to small groups, but make life difficult in the long run for the large majority and, ultimately, for all.

Conversely, man, as an individual and as a social being, is influenced by the natural surroundings. If these change, the impact is felt on the state of man's mental and physical health, on his total living conditions, be they related to food, work, housing or social relationships.

Never before has man possessed such powerful means to change his environment as today.

Natural resources are used on a scale which could not be imagined only a few decades ago. Population grows at a rate unparalleled in history. Science and technology provide an ever increasing number of people with enormous opportunities to change the environment. The pressure on the natural resources increases.

In certain parts of the world the environment is, in fact, undergoing serious deterioration and, in some cases, destruction. This means that natural resources are depleted and that processes are set in motion which, if unchecked, will drastically change and damage the conditions for human life.

This phenomenon is clearly visible in countries in an advanced stage of industrialization and urbanization. As more countries approach and enter this phase of development, the problem becomes more serious. A worldwide exchange of knowledge and experience is required to prevent repetition of mistakes made.

During previous historical epochs, when conditions for human life in a certain geographical region were destroyed through human action, civilization could flourish in another region, and movements of population could take place. When the natural environment is destroyed in the world of today, no emigration can solve the problem, neither from one part of the planet to another, nor to another planet. There is no escape from the problems created by the depletion of resources and by disturbances in the living systems on the thin surface of the earth between soil, water and atmosphere.

If the pressure against the natural resources increases beyond the point of regeneration, nature is ruined and cannot be restored. There is a point of no return. Determined efforts must be made to stop developments which bring this point nearer.

The facts are well known, and I will not tire you with repeating them in any detail. But I think it might be useful if I briefly review the dimensions of the problem.

The basic components of the physical environment of man are fertile soil, fresh water of high quality and of sufficient quantity, living oceans and air of the right composition and the right temperature. The quality of these four basic components is dependent on the living organisms – from the microscopic algae and soil microbes to the most developed forms of life and to man himself. The quality of environment is in other words dependent on the interaction of all these forms of life, on the maintenance of balanced ecological systems. In the last analysis, the continued existence of man is dependent upon how these four basic components continue to play their respective roles in the cycles of the living world.

Nature regenerates itself, but if man by the use of techniques, which are exclusive to man, intervenes in these processes beyond the limits that nature tolerates, nature is ruined and cannot be regenerated. There is a point of no return beyond which no meaningful life is possible.

Serious mistakes that have brought us close to, and sometimes beyond, this point have been made in the countries that are generally described as developed. It is of the utmost importance that they are not repeated in areas of the world that now undergo rapid industrialization and urbanization.

May I now say a few words about each one of the four basic components of the physical environment. It is a well known fact of history that many civilizations have been destroyed by the erosion of the soil. In old times when the number of men was comparatively small, new areas with virgin fertile soil could be found, when the old ones were destroyed. In our age the whole globe is populated, and no large new regions are available once the old regions have grown less fertile. It is more important than ever that soils are maintained as fertile as possible and, in particular, that none are being destroyed beyond the possibility of regeneration. However, in spite of this knowledge soil erosion continues on a global scale, as becomes clear from an examination of numerous studies made by scientific institutions, FAO and many other bodies.

The mechanism of soil erosion varies between the different climatic zones. In the temperate regions wind erosion and the lowering of the ground water levels constitute the most serious problems. When the cities and the industries use up too much of the ground water, the soils grow drier and the situation gets more serious.

In certain highly industrialized regions water is used to such an extent that rain and snow only replace one third of what is used. We already see the signs of water scarcity in these too densely populated and industrialized regions.

The same problems, although partly due to other factors, are found in the tropical regions. The situation there is complicated by the fact that many tropical soils are even more sensitive than the soils of the temperate regions. If such soils are left without cover, the hot sun changes the soil to a leathery surface.

The next step is that the soil grows hard as brick stone. This laterized soil cannot be used anymore and must be left as a desert. No technique is known by which laterized soil could be made fertile again.

The second component of the physical environment is water.

In many temperate regions, where nature has supplied man lavishly with fresh water, this asset has been used as if it could never come to an end. The rich countries in those regions have for that reason treated the water resources in a careless way. Rivers and lakes are used as recipients for all the wastes and poisons of the cities and industries usually without any purification of the effluents. A particular problem in this field which is causing serious misgivings and has necessitated governmental action in my country is the spread of methylated mercury.

The degradation of the quality of the fresh water has accelerated even more than expected because of the introduction of phosphate-containing synthetic detergents, which fertilize the lakes to such an extent that they ultimately die. The situation rapidly develops in this direction. In many cases the degradation has reached the point where no self-purification is possible in the limited time span man has at his disposal. The end phase of the destruction of a lake is a hydrogen sulphide stinking body of water where the fish has died.

Simultaneously, due to the extensive use of water in cities and by industries, the ground water level sinks dangerously low.

The mistakes which have led to this situation should not be repeated in those countries that now enter the phase of industrialization and urbanization. These countries may still steer the development in a better direction.

The coastal waters are in many places used as dumping places for wastes from cities and industries. Often it is not the emitting industry or even the polluting country that is first hurt in these cases. Other nations, other population groups can get their life conditions changed and endangered. The water currents and the fish do not know any borders. International regulations are indeed badly needed if the problems are to be solved.

May I here also point to the dangers constituted by oil, dangers which have been dramatized by a well-known recent catastrophe and which are increasing at an alarming rate.

Furthermore, the disturbances created by man can lead to, and have lead to, the extinction of whole species of fish etc., thereby causing not only severe strains on the food situation in the world and great difficulties to the economy of the fishing nations. The extinction will also cause changes in the metabolism of the oceans which are difficult to anticipate. It is necessary that these matters are considered again internationally.

Still bigger disturbances of the living systems in the oceans seem to be impending.

Only one danger will be mentioned here. The pesticide DDT is very resistant to detoxification and degradation in nature. This was thought to be an advantage when DDT was introduced two decades ago. This substance is thus active for years after it has given the planned results. The winds, the waters and all their inhabitants have spread DDT to all the corners of the world, and it is to be found in the body fat and nervous tissues of all living beings, including man. According to a scientific report from the spring 1968, 1/1000 of a gram of DDT in thousand kg of water may lower the metabolism of the algae by 75 per cent. This is a direct threat to the life of the algae, since hundreds of thousands of tons of DDT are spread over the continents every year, and of which a major part ultimately finds its way to the oceans.

The algae in the oceans supply the atmosphere with three quarters of the oxygen. We may thus endanger even the vitally important oxygen content of the air.

The algae also constitute the basic food for all the marine organisms. If the existence of the algae is threatened, then all life of the kind we know is also threatened.

As to the third component, the air, I would like to make the following observations.

The air pollution that we now hear so much about is caused by the finely divided particles and the gases that are transported by the winds. A major part of these very small particles in the atmosphere are the result of human action in cities, in industries and in agriculture. In the air of the cities these finely divided particles become charged with the gaseous substances emitted in all kinds of combustion activities, like heating, motors, production of electric energy, burning of wastes, etc. Polluted particles seem to be one of the major causes of the increase in lung diseases like cancer and chronic bronchitis. Careful planning and the strict observance of certain rules are necessary if these hazards are to be limited or eliminated. Again, past mistakes must be avoided when planning the future expanding cities, their traffic and industry.

The enormous emission of particles to the atmosphere may cause a cooling of the surface of the earth, because part of the sunlight is reflected away. A car driving at 35 miles an hour emits around 1 billion particles a second. The corresponding figures for aircraft flying at high speed are truly astronomical. Even if such an extreme situation is not impending, smaller changes in the climate of the world could be caused by the reflecting particles.

The increasing reflection of solar energy by the dust particles is counteracted by another process.

Mankind combusts at the moment the reserves of fossil fuels that are stored in the earth crust millions of years ago. This combustion gives an increase in the atmosphere's content of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide counteracts the heat emission from the earth. This mechanism could thus cease an increase in the temperature.

No definite answers to which process may be the more important are available at the moment.

What is evident, however, is that man has already rendered the temperature equilibrium of the globe more unstable.

In this context may I briefly refer to the problem of noise? In a near future this problem which in earlier times seemed to be limited to cities and industries, may become more general when supersonic aircraft are introduced also for civilian use. The medical experts know that large groups of people, exposed to strong intermittent noise for long periods, may be damaged physically and mentally. Hundreds of millions of people may be exposed to intense noise without being able to protect themselves -- in order to allow relatively few people to reach their destinations a few hours earlier.

It is quite obvious that the totality of the problems that I now refer to are made immeasurably more difficult and complex as a result of rapid urbanization. The huge increase of the population in the cities invariably provokes an enormous pressure on the environment.

The cities of Europe increased at the highest rate at the end of the 19th century. The rate of increase seldom exceeded 2 per cent a year. In spite of this rather low rate of increase -- low when compared to the rate of increase found in the now developing countries (approaching an average of 5 per cent a year) -- the cities did not succeed in solving the waste and pollution problems in a rational way. The results of the lack of waste and pollution management now place the cities of the industrialized countries before problems that are exceedingly difficult to solve. A city which had from the beginning taken these problems into account would have kept the expenses for environmental monitoring and control down, expenses that are now necessary if these cities are to survive in the long run.

The cities have not been built to cope with modern traffic, even less with the industrial pollution and the environmental poisons. These problems are and will be increasingly facing the old industrialized nations during the next decades. The mistakes committed should not be repeated by the nations now entering the necessary path of rapid industrialization.

A high degree of planning in rapidly expanding cities seems to be an absolute necessity. Nobody can know exactly how a city should be constructed to suit the inhabitants in an optimal way. This depends, to a large extent, on political considerations and social value judgments. But there is general agreement that environmental destruction caused by deficient sewage systems and polluted air should not be allowed to occur. Such problems may be solved without too large expenditures if plans are made in time, but they cannot be solved inexpensively if the planning is delayed for too long a time, as has happened in many industrialized nations.

We firmly believe that political considerations and social value judgments are shared around the world to such an extent that there is, in fact, general agreement also on what should and could be done, in a positive manner, to plan the future development of cities in such a manner that the people living in them are spared the stresses and sufferings, alarming crime rates, and social disturbances of all kinds, characteristic of many cities at the present time.

What I have now said indicates the complexity of the problems involved, but it also, I hope, serves to define them. What we are concerned with here is, in the first place, how to limit and, if possible, to eliminate the evil side-effects which might follow upon the utilization of science and technology. It is obvious that if economic development is to take place at a rate and on a social scale adequate to meet the growing expectations of a growing world population, all natural resources will have to be used to the full and in the most economic manner. But it would be a mistake, and one with potentially momentous consequences for mankind, if we did not do our utmost to avoid the deleterious side-effects of such utilization. It is true that there can sometimes be a conflict, at least in the short run, between the interest of rapid development on one hand and the preservation of the environmental quality on the other hand, but if a price has to be paid, it should be done in complete knowledge of the facts and consequences, always keeping the long range interests properly in view. Everything should be done to avoid repeating mistakes that have already been committed and to plan for the future in such a way that the risk of mistakes is excluded or minimized.

The other equally important aspect is a positive one. Man is now in possession of scientific and technological resources which are truly spectacular. It can safely be assumed that further progress will follow in the years ahead. The achievements of science and technology must be geared to the improvement of the quality of human life. Economic growth is not an end in itself. It should serve ultimately to satisfy basic human needs and the furthering of human rights. Working and living conditions must be made safer and better suited to the aspirations of modern man. The cravings for spiritual and cultural satisfaction must be satisfied. Man is now in possession not only of the physical means of achieving this. He is also in possession of the knowledge allowing him, if he chooses to do so, to plan rationally his own environment in order to build a happier future. A famous modern writer has described our time as "the accidental century" to indicate that we have all too often let the miraculous changes in our environment, brought about by science and technology, just happen to us without proper foresight and without proper planning. This must not be allowed to continue.

What could the United Nations do in this field? First of all I wish to draw the attention on the important work that is being performed by many of the specialized agencies and other members of the United Nations Family. WHO has for some time been active in the field of water and air pollution. One important report on environmental pollution and its control (E/4457) has been prepared earlier this year by the WHO for ECOSOC. It has been carefully studied by my Government. The Swedish authorities concerned, and I am sure it is true about the authorities of many countries, have found it extremely valuable. The same goes for the report on conservation and rational use of the environment (E/4458) which has been prepared by UNESCO and FAO, also for the benefit of ECOSOC. UNESCO is organizing, with the participation of the United Nations, FAO and WHO, as well as with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and the International Biological Programme, a Conference on the Biosphere this coming September. The conclusions and recommendations of this conference are eagerly expected. Various aspects of the total problem are under study by WHO, IAEA, IMCO and ILO. ECE is planning increased efforts on certain aspects and will organize a regional conference to take place probably in 1970.

I would like here to refer to the Secretary-General's report (E/4553) which gives an admirable account of the work done so far by the various United Nations Agencies. We are deeply grateful to the Secretary General and his collaborators for the report.

All the work that is now going on deserves our active support and should be encouraged in every possible way.

The Swedish Government has come to the conclusion that valuable, indeed indispensable, as all these efforts are, there is a real need to provide a framework for a comprehensive discussion of them within the United Nations. Such a discussion would serve the purpose of encouraging the international organizations to intensify their efforts which should be seen as interrelated and mutually supporting. It would also serve to give these efforts a common outlook and direction so as to achieve maximal efficiency. It is for the Government Members of the United Nations to give this encouragement, this direction and this inspiration. So this should be one of the purposes of United Nations action.

Many national Governments are also devoting increasing attention to the problem.

Many of them have taken practical action of a legislative and administrative character to combat water and air pollution, soil erosion, etc.

However, although the urgency, gravity and complexity of the problems are more and more recognized by Governments and the various agencies and institutions which serve these Governments, it would nevertheless be highly desirable to draw the attention of Governments to the need for action, both on the national and international level, and to provide them with better and fuller knowledge about the means to cope with the problems.

Moreover, the scientists and technicians who are active in the various fields of the quality of human environment should be given an opportunity to present their views, their knowledge and their misgivings to selected administrators and leaders of public opinion whose collaboration is necessary if effective action is to be possible both nationally and internationally.

Finally, there is a need to identify those problems which can only, at best, be solved through international collaboration and agreement. This task requires a broad exchange of views in a comprehensive framework.

It is the conviction of the Swedish Government that all the purposes now mentioned would best be served by a decision taken by the General Assembly to call an international Conference under the auspices of the United Nations. We would hope that such a decision might be taken already at the 23d session.

The character of the conference that we have in mind emerges from what I have now said. We would thus not envisage it as a conference of government plenipotentiaries, authorized to pass resolutions or adopt conventions. Nor would it be a mere gathering of experts drawn from various scientific and technical institutions. It would rather be a meeting ground for both scientists, technicians, administrators, politicians and other persons engaged in work on various aspects of the matter. Obviously the participation has to be kept to the minimum compatible with the tasks set for the conference. We would attach special importance to the presence at the conference and the active participation of representatives of the specialized agencies and other organs members of the United Nations System as well as the interested MGO's.

Naturally if a Conference of this type is to be successful, it will have to be very carefully prepared. In particular, the cooperation of both international agencies and national governments as well as non-governmental organizations will have to be enlisted. There are various methods that can be used to undertake these preparations, and it might be useful at some stage to ask the Secretary General to present a study as to alternative suggestions. In line with our general thinking about the proper role of the Economic and Social Council as the main co-ordinating body of the United Nations economic and social activities, we further believe that the Council should be given a task in considering both the time and place of a Conference, the programme of work for a Conference, and other matters connected with the preparations. In particular, the conclusions and recommendations from the coming Paris Conference on the Biosphere will have to be carefully considered. I wish to say here that we attach very great importance to this particular conference. We do not feel that there is any reason to believe that the results of a conference will change our views as to the desirability of a conference of the character we are thinking of, but it is evident that they will have to be taken into account when considering the programme of work for the Conference.

The timing of the Conference is, of course, a matter for careful consideration. This matter will have to be studied and decided in the light of both the estimated length of the appropriate preparations for the Conference and of the calendar of conferences of the United Nations. I wish to recall that the General Assembly has expressed the wish that only one major international conference take place each year. In view of what is now known about the calendar for the United Nations, the year 1971 might be suitable. This date would also, it seems to us, allow for the necessary preparations. However, as far as the Swedish delegation is concerned, whether it is held a year or two later is not a decisive question. I wish to say, however, that the calendar of the United Nations must not be determined for the years to come in such a way that no place can be found for the consideration for this question, the importance of which will no doubt only become more obvious as time passes by.

Mr. President, it is easy to dramatize the issue now before the Council and to use apocalyptic words to describe the impending doom of humanity. I will refrain from doing so. I think that the cold facts and figures presented to us in studies and publications, many of them coming from United Nations organizations, speak eloquently enough in favour of early and energetic action.

The Swedish Government is convinced that, under all circumstances, it will become imperative for the Member countries, separately and jointly, at some stage to take far reaching measures in order to prevent irreparable damage and to build a more harmonious and humane environment. Such action may be postponed but the price of postponement will be high.