- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,590
- Reactions
- 7,468
So they are going to cut down trees to make packaging ?
Doesn't sound a great idea to me.
Did you know ? Once-upon-a-time.. it was the Republicians in the US who were leaders in protecting the environment !! Or so it appears.
Environmental Protection Was Once a Top Priority of Republicans
As delivered on the Senate floor
Mr. President, I rise today for the seventy-sixth time to urge my colleagues that it is time for us to wake up to the growing threats of climate change. Not a single state remains unaffected by the unprecedented changes we are already seeing, driven by the excessive carbon pollution that we continue to dump into our oceans and atmosphere.
Yet in Washington, our Republican colleagues either parrot the polluter line that climate change is just a hoax, or stay silent. No one will step forward.
Mr. President, it was not always this way. Environmental protection was once a top priority of the Republican Party. Seems remarkable now, but it’s true. In the early 1970s, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act were all passed with broad bipartisan support, and signed by a Republican President. In the 1980s and 1990s, bipartisan majorities voted to strengthen those laws, led by Rhode Island’s Republican Senator, John Chafee – who served as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee and whose seat I now have the honor to hold.
Conservation and stewardship were once fundamental principles of American conservatism. From seminal thinkers of the conservative movement to great Republican leaders of the twentieth century, the conservative ideal included a commitment to interests of future generations.
Today, under a relentless barrage of unlimited corporate spending in our elections, much and perhaps most of it by polluters, the interests of future generations have taken a back seat to the interests of the oil companies and coal barons. The disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision let polluters cast their dark shadow over Republicans in Congress who might otherwise work with Democrats on curbing their carbon pollution.
[Edmund Burke chart]
Edmund Burke, an Irish-born Member of the British Parliament, is considered by many the father of modern conservatism. Sir Winston Churchill called him “a foremost apostle of Liberty.” Burke was a staunch defender of our American Colonies and his statue stands here in Washington today. His 1790 conservative manifesto, Reflections on the Revolution in France, cautioned that we are but “temporary possessors” of our society. If individuals are “unmindful of what they have received from their ancestors, or of what is due to their posterity,” he wrote, “[n]o one generation could link with another. Men would become little better than flies of a summer.”
In our case, flies of a carbon-fueled summer.
[Russell Kirk chart]
Russell Kirk was a Distinguished Scholar at the Heritage Foundation, who none other than President Ronald Reagan dubbed “the prophet of American conservatism.” He wrote a 1970 piece for the Baltimore Sun, “Conservation Activism is a Healthy Sign.”
“Nothing,” Kirk wrote, “is more conservative than conservation.”
The noted essayist and Kentucky farmer Wendell Berry—known for what The American Conservative magazine called his “unshakable devotion to the land, to localism, and to the dignity of traditional life,” wrote in 1993: “Our destruction of nature is not just bad stewardship, or stupid economics, or a betrayal of family responsibility; it is the most horrid blasphemy.”
(Berry would also remind us in this chamber that “[w]hether we and our politicians know it or not, Nature is a party to all our deals and decisions, and she has more votes.”)
https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/n...ection-was-once-a-top-priority-of-republicans
After listening to ABC radio the other day, a story how sea walls are being destroyed in China for factories, high rise, etc, I recalled an OzGeo article last year about the same thing.
This is the online version : http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/topics/wildlife/2017/05/migratory-shorebirds
If they're using something made from wood then I can't see a major drama with that but before supermarkets get rid of plastic I'd rather they got rid of non-recyclable metals use in packaging.A new generation of manufacturers and scientists is working to tackle the global plastic waste crisis head on
My local supermarket is now giving away their more durable plastic bags by discounting the $0.15 charge. I suspect they're worried that people might shop elsewhere unless they do so. Certainly a great example of mankind meeting destiny on the path taken to avoid it.I was chatting with a mate of mine, who is a recycling technician(garbo), he was saying the banning of single use plastic bags was madness.
He said the cheap bags broke down really quickly, now people are using the better quality ones as bin liners and they don't break down at all.
I wonder if any Government Dept is monitoring the effect of the ban ?
My wife has always taken her own bags shopping, so it doesn't effect my personally, but maybe the ban will cause more environmental problems than it will cure.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...many-landfill-coles-woolworths-shops/10081496
I was chatting with a mate of mine, who is a recycling technician(garbo), he was saying the banning of single use plastic bags was madness.
He said the cheap bags broke down really quickly, now people are using the better quality ones as bin liners and they don't break down at all.
I wonder if any Government Dept is monitoring the effect of the ban ?
My wife has always taken her own bags shopping, so it doesn't effect my personally, but maybe the ban will cause more environmental problems than it will cure.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...many-landfill-coles-woolworths-shops/10081496
For just $10,000, he was able to "put a plug" in the erosion gully with the weirs, which remarkably remain almost full at a time when farm dams across eastern Australia are drying out in the middle of winter.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?