Two wrongs don’t make a right, but how many rights does it take to fix one wrong. According to LeCain, when it comes to technological fixes in the environment, we could be continuously passing around toxic waste and not make a solid impact on the pollution that humans produce. In his essay from The Technological Fix, he gave three different kinds of techno-fixes that were used for environmental issues like pollution. The Ducktown Tennessee smelter was the first example he used to show how to perform transformational and relocation techno-fixes. Because the Ducktown smelter product deadly sulfur dioxide that was destroying the beautiful mountains and wildlife, the state of Georgia was granted the right to shut it down (LeCain 2013, 140). Instead of doing so, they allowed them to remove the sulfur from the smoke and produce sulfuric acid, which is a form of a transformational techno-fix. They then sold the sulfuric acid to a fertilizer manufacture as a form of a relocation techno-fix to supposedly clean up the entire mess. That combined process in itself only put off the environmental damage of farmland and lake algae. Because it was unsuccessful one could say it was more of a delaying technological fix. Bring it back to LeCain main point, “All three types of techno-fixes ultimately result in other environmental problems” (LeCain 2013, 139).
LeCain’s analysis of mining’s effects on the environment might raise enough cause to simply not mine copper that requires damaging processes, yet “simply avoiding certain ores or not mining and smelting at all might have not been a realistic option” (LeCain 2013, 151). It seems his overall point is that techno-fixes have humbled the scientific community and there ability to control our environment. Though now knowing of our failures that we must simply move forward and try again. Reading this myself, I get the feeling that it is possible to find an actual techno-fix for pollution and not once again backlash in our faces.