Game 2

Sometimes I like to play the Net Environmental benefit game. In this game you try to use environmental reasons to argue against something that is based on environmental reasons. If you are successful then you switch sides and you repeat until you fail to come up with a good argument. Here is an example of a round of the Net Environmental-benefit game:

In Vermont they don't use salt on the roads or sidewalks because it is bad for the local wildlife for all that salt to be washing over the ground and into rivers in the spring. Instead they put down sand which does not melt the ice but improves traction. Switch. Is there really a net environmental benefit if even one person falls and breaks a bone? What are the costs to the Earth's natural resources of making the x-ray and the cast, and the fact that most everything the patient touches in the hospital will be thrown away afterwards to prevent disease transmission? Switch. The salt affects more than just the wildlife, it also increases the rate of rusting of cars, meaning that more replacement parts must be made from our natural resources, and worthless rusty metal gets put in a junkyard somewhere. Game Over.