Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumWorld's infrastructure projects spell doom for Planet Earth
"More than 80 of the world's leading scientists, environmentalists, indigenous leaders, farmers, philanthropists and authors have signed a letter to Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, current president of the G20 group of the world's major economies, saying that they are "deeply concerned" about the G20s focus on mobilizing as much as $60-$70 trillion of investments in large infrastructure projects over the next 15 years.
"Trillions of dollars spent in pursuit of typical megaprojects in the energy, transportation, agriculture and water sectors could put in place infrastructure that eliminates wildlife habitat, destroys fisheries, undermines vital ecosystems and further destabilizes the Earths climate.
"From roads slicing up pristine wilderness and highways disrupting critical wildlife corridors to dams flooding rain forests, ruining freshwater biodiversity and forcing people to relocate, many mega-infrastructure projects have ultimately caused more harm than good."
http://www.alternet.org/environment/worlds-biggest-economies-have-devised-plan-spells-doom-planet-earth
eridani
(51,907 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)The mining, habitat disruption, waste material - it all goes into the "devastation" column.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)How many of the 80-plus signers live in a house or apartment, instead of a cave?
Nihil
(13,508 posts)... and have won the "Pointless Redirection Attempt" award for this thread ...
hatrack
(59,593 posts)Same old shit, again and again and again.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)you would consider "I've got mine, just try and get yours, suckers" as a dead horse, too?
Most people I know live in a house or apartment, served by infrastructure. Or, at least they want to. I assume the signers of this document already have something that they want to see no more of. Now that they've got theirs, of course.
I'm not saying that all infrastructure projects are univerally good. I certainly acknowledge that some can be poorly thought out. But on the other hand, if people who are experts at mitigating damage are called in, consulted, and listened to, infrastructure improvements can be done effectively, successfully, and in ways that do minimal, if any, harm to the environment.
Don't the people who need infrastucture deserve some consideration from the people who already have the benefit of progress?
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Nobody actually "needs" infrastructure. All of it damages the planet; all of it separates human beings from nature and each other; all of it increases our level of alienation. What's the upside? Television and mercury amalgam fillings???
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)from the computer in your cave.
And if you're talking about prehistoric humans, it was millions of years that they lived without infrastructure. And yes, they weren't separated from nature, it usually killed them by the time they were in their thirties. I don't want to live in that kind of world. I suspect that a majority of humanity feels exactly the same way.
You can advocate getting rid of it from your cave, if you're honest, or from your house or apartment if you don't mind being viewed as a hypocrite.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)There is no plan(et) B.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Especially if capitalism takes over the world, like it has been doing. Heck, even so called "communist" countries have capitalism. Even if it is State-run capitalism, it is capitalism, none the less. A system that is based on infinite profits with infinite resources. They do not seem to understand that there are finite resources on Planet Earth, and they are killing us all in the process.
Okay, I'm done ranting, but you get my point.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)Call is capitalist, communist, whatever, it works the same way.