While the transition from a combustion-powered society to electrification is already underway due to market forces alone, this transition will take generations without support. But we have every incentive – environmental, economic, and yes, moral – to speed the evolution.
I’ve used the prestige and influence of having been a president of the United States as effectively as possible. And secondly, I’ve still been able to carry out my commitments to peace and human rights and environmental quality and freedom and democracy and so forth.
While the Environmental Genome Project does not seek to assign allele frequencies, we are aware of the importance of accurate allele frequency estimates for future epidemiologic studies and the large sample sizes such estimates will require.
Humankind has never transitioned to energy sources that are more costly, less reliable, and have a larger environmental footprint than the incumbent – and yet that’s precisely what adding large amounts of solar and wind to the grid requires.
There is an old belief that solving environmental problems can only be achieved by first building enough economic wealth so we can ‘afford to save the environment.’ This ‘Kuznets Curve’ thinking has never been correct and must be abandoned once and for all if we are serious about economic development for a thriving humanity on Earth.
It is all very well for 2% of the population to live in a monastic state of meatlessness while everyone else gorges their way towards environmental meltdown or the nearest heart clinic. Vegetarianism is good for the willing minority, but not much use as a campaign tool.
There is the GIS world that is largely managing authoritative data sources, supporting geocentric workflows like fixing roads, making cities more livable through better planning, environmental management, forest management, drilling in the right location for oil, managing assets and utilities.
Time after time we’re told corporations should have freedom from pesky job safety regulations, environmental protections and labor standards – giving working people the freedom to be crushed in collapsing mines, choke on filthy air and get paid too little to live on.
It is one of the issues that will have to be worked through however let me make the point and I think anyone would accept that if you set it up properly, not only will you get better environmental outcomes, you have a chance to create more wealth with the available resource.
I am going to confront the old-fashioned negative thinking which says that all government needs to do to generate growth is cut worker and environmental protections, cut taxes on the rich and stroke ‘fat cats’ until they purr with pleasure. I’m completely repudiating the idea that government has to get out of the way.
Congress created tax-exempt 501(c)(4)s to operate exclusively for social welfare purposes like early childhood education, environmental protection, and veteran’s assistance. However, an IRS regulation allows 501(c)(4)s to operate primarily for the promotion of social welfare.
As fears about the energy and environmental crises reach a fever pitch, we’re all searching for solutions. And one possibility is that we could fix everything if we’d just shrink our population back down to about 2 billion people – which would put us roughly where we were at 80 years ago.
I decided that now is the time to start doing the things that really interest me and I find important. It was in the 10 years of the MacArthur grant that I began working on my first book… and I began putting more work into environmental history.
Although environmental groups sometimes raise issues in the confirmation process, environmental protection is not central to the fear-mongering of the liberal interest groups that oppose conservative judges. But the threat to basic environmental protections from conservative jurisprudence is broad-based and severe.
The government employs scientists of many varieties in technical capacities, from estimating the environmental toxicity of a chemical to the structural soundness of a bridge. But when it comes to forming policies, these scientists and, especially, behavioral scientists are rarely at the table with the lawyers and the economists.
Dealing with environmental lawsuits and grassroots resistance is expensive. Industrial wind and solar developers have to hire lawyers, public relations specialists, and scientists willing to testify that this or that project poses only a modest threat to endangered birds and bats.
I have younger friends who are in this pinch where they feel they’ve been counted out before they’ve had a chance to prove themselves. They’ve inherited a lot of debt – not just student debt but environmental debt, political debt. They really feel squeezed.
I worked as a draftsman for the Department of Environmental Protection, and as a teacher, in N.Y.C.; at a big bank and a small ad agency, a tiny law firm and a few giant ones; as a cashier and a dishwasher; preparing deli sandwiches and stringing tennis racquets and pruning evergreens into conical Christmas-tree shapes.
The Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS), which controls the living environment on shuttles and on the International Space Station, doesn’t have the luxury of disposal: discharging trash into space has long been judged a bad idea.
I have voted against only one of President Obama’s nominees: Michael Froman, a Citigroup alumnus who is currently storming the halls of Congress as U.S. Trade Representative pushing trade deals that threaten to undermine financial regulation, workers’ rights, and environmental protections.
The industrial processes in use today were developed at a time when no one had to consider what the environmental impact was. Who cared? But making ecological concerns matter to a company’s bottom line will help it do the research and development that will reinvent everything we buy.
I’ve always been a strong supporter of environmental protection and initiatives in that area. But I’m willing to set priorities. If we have to make reductions in one place, we’ll have to-in order to increase another place, I’m willing to do that.
At least three studies, in the U.S., Canada and Sweden, have linked glyphosate exposure to the disease, and in 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer found glyphosate to be a ‘probable’ cause of cancer in humans. California’s state environmental protection agency has also declared it a probable carcinogen.
My idea of an amusement park story is getting adventurers to go tour environmental disaster areas. After all, if the entire Great Barrier Reef gets killed, which seems like an extremely lively possibility, what are you going to do with all that rotting limestone?
I’m a latecomer to the environmental issue, which for years seemed to me like an excuse for more government regulation. But I can see that in rich societies, voters are paying less attention to economic issues and more to issues of the spirit, including the environment.
