Remember, the stuff is all but discontinued, it is environmentally a "bad guy" such that only one place on the whole globe will develop it and it gives you such reds and yellows that it is an addictive drug!
George:
I think you are mistaken about the environmental impact about Kodachrome, at least in respect of the most recent K14 process.
The earlier, K12 process was a very high volume process - many labs would process thousands of feet of film each day in massive machines (remember that they used the same machines to process Kodachrome movie film). While the environmental "footprint" was very small, on a per roll basis, the sheer volumes of materials and energy used were likely to have some effect.
During its heyday, and during the busy summer months, the Kodak lab where my father worked in North Vancouver, British Columbia, ran three shifts and 24 hours per day.
In addition, any effluent that did result was fully treated and there were other extensive measures in place to minimize or eliminate the environmental impact.
IIRC, one of the reasons for developing the K14 process was to permit smaller, lower volume labs, which use much smaller amounts of chemistry and energy (and thus have a lower environmental impact).
It is the complexity of the process, as much as anything that has led to its falling out of mainstream favour.
Matt