The extremes must come closer to each other for the problems caused by environmental pollution to be solved equitably. E nvironmental issues are certain to assume enhanced prominence throughout the 1990s and into the twenty-first century. Environmentalism will provide new business opportunities, such as marketing biodegradable plastics, dolphin-safe canned tuna, and even wristwatches containing small gardens of grass. The most significant economic effect of the environmental movement, however, will continue to be business costs of complying with government regulations and corporate liability for damages from pollution. As environmental control costs grow, the pattern of regulation and liability will continue to evolve in new directions. Environmental regulation and liability already carry enormous economic effect. The Environmental Protection Agency estimated that private industry spent $64 billion in 1988 to prevent or clean up pollution, and federal, state, and local governments spent an additional $31 billion. The expenses of pollution control have steadily increased since the early 1970s. The soon-to-bepassed reauthorization of the Clean Air Act will probably add another $10-$20 billion in annual economic cost. Countless additional dollars are paid out in common law and statutory liability awards and settlements for environmental damages. Economic studies have attributed a significant portion of the nation's productivity slowdown to environmental expenditures. Environmental protection regulation and liability have become an integral part of business planning for most industries, including many promising hightech industries. To state the considerable costs of pollution control is not to dejustify them, however. Environmental contamination annually causes billions of dollars of direct economic loss, without even considering costs to public health and quality of life. Eliminating pollution control expenditures is not an economically efficient action and is politically unacceptable. As costs rise, pressure from international competition makes it increasingly essential not to waste expenditures on relatively valueless endeavors, but to obtain the greatest possible environmental protection bang for the buck. Traditional environmental regulation, unfortunately, has been neither particularly efficient nor effective. Environmental concerns have been marked by considerable antagonism between the environmental and industrial communities. In a political attempt to appear greener than thou, environmental activists have demanded the most extreme levels of environmental protection and refused to consider the costs of such protection. Industrial representatives have too often fought even efficient environmental protection measures and employed spurious science on behalf of their position. The product of this hostile battle is only coincidentally beneficial to society in general. The recent shift in attitudes of both these political combatants offers promise for improved environmental policies.