- Thread starter
- #41
- Oct 9, 2010
- 449
- 13
- 111
Quote:
I believe that if we start using energy produced in a way that doesn't emit green house effect gases, if we stop deforesting and start planting more trees than very probably there would be a significant change. But I admit it's very hard to make people do this, since many of this things would make them loose some life quality and nobody (in developed countries, but specially in U.S.) accepts that (only when consequences are felt in their yard there will be some sort of effort to change, by now most of the problems resulting from environmental irresponsibility are being felt in Africa, so, sadly "nobody cares").
USA does more planting than chopping. 1 tree equal 3 more planted.
That's fair, but sadly that doesn't account for the trees cut by US companies in Amazonia per example. That would be a fair comparison if you said by 1 CONSUMED tree 3 are PLANTED, although I know that is hard to keep record of, so let me explain what I mean by saying what I said.
Per example, US has only 5 percent of the world's population, but United States citizens consume 28 percent of earth's nonrenewable resources, and drive more than one-third of earths auto-mobiles. How do you think US citizens react if there was a governmental order that limited the Oil consumption per person to (Number of extracted barrels in the world/number of people in the world), I think that riots would be inevitable. So, that's why I said, people maybe worried about earth future as long as they don't need to loose life quality. Of course in the places where they live bellow their share there is no need to loose life quality, so that's why I said "but specially in U.S.".
I believe that if we start using energy produced in a way that doesn't emit green house effect gases, if we stop deforesting and start planting more trees than very probably there would be a significant change. But I admit it's very hard to make people do this, since many of this things would make them loose some life quality and nobody (in developed countries, but specially in U.S.) accepts that (only when consequences are felt in their yard there will be some sort of effort to change, by now most of the problems resulting from environmental irresponsibility are being felt in Africa, so, sadly "nobody cares").
USA does more planting than chopping. 1 tree equal 3 more planted.
That's fair, but sadly that doesn't account for the trees cut by US companies in Amazonia per example. That would be a fair comparison if you said by 1 CONSUMED tree 3 are PLANTED, although I know that is hard to keep record of, so let me explain what I mean by saying what I said.
Per example, US has only 5 percent of the world's population, but United States citizens consume 28 percent of earth's nonrenewable resources, and drive more than one-third of earths auto-mobiles. How do you think US citizens react if there was a governmental order that limited the Oil consumption per person to (Number of extracted barrels in the world/number of people in the world), I think that riots would be inevitable. So, that's why I said, people maybe worried about earth future as long as they don't need to loose life quality. Of course in the places where they live bellow their share there is no need to loose life quality, so that's why I said "but specially in U.S.".
Last edited:
