There is an interesting proposal from the UN's Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity project (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/21/biodiversity-un-report). It is argued that the costs resulting from losses of natural organisms that 'do jobs' for we humans (e.g. fertilise 'our' plants, recycle materials and control flood waters) are a magnitude greater than the costs involved in attempting to conserve them. It is consequently argued that preventing extinctions may be even more important than curtailing global warming (in a financial sense, assuming we are still here). All this may well be true but it does seem slightly dodgy that these things have to be converted into pounds, euros and dollars before they interest politicians and the voters. I have no 'beef' with the idea, however, that destructive agencies should be taxed at a rate commensurate with the environmental damage they cause.
This blog may help people explore some of the 'hidden' issues involved in certain media treatments of environmental and scientific issues. Using personal digital images, it's also intended to emphasise seasonal (and other) changes in natural history of the Swansea (South Wales) area. The material should help participants in field-based modules and people generally interested in the natural world. The views are wholly those of the author.
Saturday 22 May 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What's In a Critter's Name? 11. Comma butterfly
The Comma butterfly ( Polygonia c-album) gets its name from the punctuation-like mark, on the underside of its wings.
-
The UK government continue their quest to turn England's rivers back into sewers. They first facilitated the privatised water companies...
-
Garden plants in France, The Netherlands, The UK and Sikkim (NE India).
No comments:
Post a Comment