| The definition of "acceptable environmental cost" |
| Saturday, 12 July 2008 18:31 |
|
Is it really ok to destroy the Canadian Boreal forest, one of the last three untouched forests on Earth, just for us to be able to drive our cars? Is it really ok to create big lakes of toxic waste water, just to be able to live in the illusion that was the consumption society a few years more?
Have a look at this video about Canadian tar sands and Australian shale oil to see what I mean. Skip to 3:20 where it gets interesting. Let's face it, the "steady economic growth" and "use and throw away" society that we've been living in was just a dream, a 50 year long dream that is now turning into a nightmare. Remember this is a transitory use of the land. Our job is not to necessarily make it pretty, it's to make it effective, to make it safe and to make it economic.People are getting rich destroying the environment. Nothing has changed. We still don't give a damn about the climate or our planet. We want our cars, our plastics and we want to break the 7 billion people barrier.
SUV:s are already dropping in price, I really think those of you unfortunate enough to have a big gasoline thirsty car will get a nasty hole in your pocket soon. |
I'm thinking lately about what we're doing to the last untouched pristine areas of the Earth to get the last drops of oil out of the ground.