LeCain writes of three types of technofixes, the transformational techno-fix, the relocational techno-fix and the delaying techno-fix. The main argument that I got from LeCain’s writing was not only that all these technofixes overlap but that they always have unintended consequences on the environment that were not discovered until much later. A great example of this is the first case that LeCain mentions about Ducktown, Georgia and how the copper industry used the first two technofixes, transformational and relocational (8 LeCain). While on the surface it looked like the company came up with the perfect solution, repurposing the toxic waist into something that could be sold for profit and not polluting the surrounding area. However, as we see, “The majority of the fertilizer thus eventually ran off into local creeks and rivers, and in many regions often ended up concentrating in the water of nearby ponds and lakes.” (9 LeCain). The third technofix does like the previous two, simply putting off the problem but not really fixing it as it should. In the end, LeCain makes good points regarding the idea that technofixes do not work beyond just covering up the problem with a seemingly working solution that in the long run can do more harm than good.
It is the harsh reality of the industry world we live in that products such as copper and other such minerals are necessary for almost everything we do daily. While we might be slowly working in a direction of trying to find ways to reduce our need of such materials the probability that we will ever full escape such needs are minuscule. However, this does not mean that we should just stop trying to fix both the present and past. While LeCain does make sense that most technofixes do not in fact fix what they are aiming to fix there are still benefits in trying. Although in the long run it would be beneficial to step away from the idea that the quickest solution is the best solution and fully think through solutions before they are put into practice.