Nobel Prize for Environmental Concern: Which Country?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Rick Murchison:
When you throw out all the rhetoric and get right down to actions and money spent, the United States wins hands down.
Rick

Can you put some numbers and sources behind that statement?
 
As I mentioned earlier Finland scores very well on environmental issues. There's some interesting stuff on this page:
http://www.vexen.co.uk/countries/best.html
Interestingly enough as well as winning the environmental section Finland seems to be the best economically competitive country as well. This would appear to run counter to the often presented argument that environmental controls are bad for business. I suppose it might probably have more to do with the original efficiency or inefficiency of manufacturing as to how much it costs to make it conform to acceptable environmental standards.
 
Kim:
As I mentioned earlier Finland scores very well on environmental issues. There's some interesting stuff on this page:
http://www.vexen.co.uk/countries/best.html
Interestingly enough as well as winning the environmental section Finland seems to be the best economically competitive country as well. This would appear to run counter to the often presented argument that environmental controls are bad for business. I suppose it might probably have more to do with the original efficiency or inefficiency of manufacturing as to how much it costs to make it conform to acceptable environmental standards.


Regarding Finland (I'm 1/4 Finnish! :D ), you must also remember what types of industry contributes the most to the economy. Although they have some steel plants, we're talking cell phones and forestry here. Not known to be the greatest polluters, luckily.

Wether or not I will fully accept Finland's economic success as a success for all of it's people, I don't know. Fact is, that many places in Finland have very little jobs to offer. Things aren't always what they seem. Norwegian industry is for instance not competitve at all, but we seem to be up there on this list. -That's only because we export so much oil. I can't complain though. But tourists are nagging about our beer prices! :14:
 
jbilicska:
Another vote for the US. Once we make giant strides foward it is up to each of us to make sure we don't slide backwards.
We have such a diversity of ecosystems that makes it hard to save them all at once.


I hate to be the party pooper, but the rest of the world don't agree with you. Every country has it's issues, and this is nothing but one single source of information. Read it, but don't take it to be MY single opinion, ok?

http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/pollution.html
 
I'm not saying we're anywhere near perfect but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. There is rampant bribes and kickbacks being taken in all countries to look the other way when it comes to ecological protection . You did not mention what happens at all the CITES meetings and who tries to block all proposals started. Look what happened to Sweden when they tried to protect the Bluefin Tunas!! The US is anywhere from perfect but there is a lot of money spent on Conservation and for helping other Countries establish ,and more importantly realize the need for eco -friendly practices.
 
vladimir:
Just checking your reasoning here. Pacifism=environmentalism=anti-Americanism?

Take a sip of Kool-aid and just don't you worry comrad.

My only doubt is here = http://snipurl.com/l3qt
Anyhow, being hooked up to the EU grid isn't necessarily a bad thing, parts f the EU use Nuclear power extensively, which environmentalists go nuts about if we build. Come to think of it, they freak out of we build hydroelectric plants too, because they flood forests and alter flows of rivers yada yada. Solar and other options aren't up to snuff yet, but Nuclear power is one of the cleanest and most efficient sources of power. Vote is still for the Stars and stripes for reasons mentioned previously by myself and others. While RSA has the second largest coal power plant in the world, and seeing it, it isn't the most beautiful thing, RSA (especially in the limpopo province and east cape) also participate in Ecotourism converting millions of hectares of bushveld from cattle and sheep farms into hunting concessions where indigenous species are being restored in great numbers and are being carefully monitored by conservation officials. We have to find financial incentives for people to help the environment, especially in poorer countries. If these countries can turn their natural resources into attractions, they will be able to profit from their preservation, versus starving and destroying resources just to make it to the next day.

Come to think of it, the Nobel Prize is pretty corrupt anyhow, between the bribery, politics and stringpulling, any Nobel given likely went to those with the best connections having little to do with the award itself, if you have looked at the nominees for other Nobel prizes you know exactly what i mean.
 
drbill:
I'd like to think that humans have evolved, or at least could evolve, past strictly "selfish" (= survival) values. My favorite poet, Robinson Jeffers, spoke of a philosophy he called Inhumanism in which humans "uncentered" themselves and looked at the Earth and the Universe with a broader perspective. I'd like to think that kind of enlightenment is possible.

But then I think of the more recent history where the Marine Life Protection Act, passed to create a series of scientifically-based marine protected areas in California, was sidelined due to political pressure and... oh, yes, the convenient excuse of our budget crisis.

The entire school of thought on Psychological Egoism suggests that you are wrong on your thoughts above. And the sidelining of the MLPA was not only convienent, but it was quite constructive that a minority of extremists weren't able to put into place, their twisted definition of conservation, which is actually thinly veiled scheme of special interests to exclude minority groups from participating in the enjoyment of our natural resources. But you are entitled to your opinions.
 
jbilicska~
Yes, it is often forgotten just how much money we give to other countries to help them with their environmental concerns. The results of which are comparatively counted against us, because the inprovements with our support did not happen within our borders. And yes again, the CITES rules are quite fickle, its amazing how much they change not only on a yearly basis, but month to month, more paperwork, more red tape, good grief, I have to do some more within the next week or two.
 
JustinW:
Take a sip of Kool-aid and just don't you worry comrad.

My only doubt is here = http://snipurl.com/l3qt
Anyhow, being hooked up to the EU grid isn't necessarily a bad thing, parts f the EU use Nuclear power extensively, which environmentalists go nuts about if we build. Come to think of it, they freak out of we build hydroelectric plants too, because they flood forests and alter flows of rivers yada yada. Solar and other options aren't up to snuff yet, but Nuclear power is one of the cleanest and most efficient sources of power. Vote is still for the Stars and stripes for reasons mentioned previously by myself and others. While RSA has the second largest coal power plant in the world, and seeing it, it isn't the most beautiful thing, RSA (especially in the limpopo province and east cape) also participate in Ecotourism converting millions of hectares of bushveld from cattle and sheep farms into hunting concessions where indigenous species are being restored in great numbers and are being carefully monitored by conservation officials. We have to find financial incentives for people to help the environment, especially in poorer countries. If these countries can turn their natural resources into attractions, they will be able to profit from their preservation, versus starving and destroying resources just to make it to the next day.

Come to think of it, the Nobel Prize is pretty corrupt anyhow, between the bribery, politics and stringpulling, any Nobel given likely went to those with the best connections having little to do with the award itself, if you have looked at the nominees for other Nobel prizes you know exactly what i mean.



Man, that's one scary link you've got there! Are there really people who believe in this stuff, or are you just playing some irony here? Anyway, to claim the Nobel Prize Commity is corrupt is a bit on the far side. Don't you think?

What I appreciate about many US citizens is that they can mobilize a lot of effort in something they believe in. Some of you guys simply have a lot of "drive" for the matters you work for, and private citizens can accomplish a lot if the money comes available. While over here we may tend to expect the government to support the good thoughts with actions. And very often it does, luckily. I suppose that's one of the benefits of not having money and economy ruling everywhere.
 
KOMPRESSOR:
Man, that's one scary link you've got there! Are there really people who believe in this stuff, or are you just playing some irony here? Anyway, to claim the Nobel Prize Commity is corrupt is a bit on the far side. Don't you think?

What I appreciate about many US citizens is that they can mobilize a lot of effort in something they believe in. Some of you guys simply have a lot of "drive" for the matters you work for, and private citizens can accomplish a lot if the money comes available. While over here we may tend to expect the government to support the good thoughts with actions. And very often it does, luckily. I suppose that's one of the benefits of not having money and economy ruling everywhere.

Money rules in your economy as well. You give it all to the government and they rule :)

We may have more drive over here but it's because we get to keep more money so we work harder. I had a friend in graduate school from Norway and his father was a doctor. He got paid the same whether he saw 50 patients a day or 5, so he decided to see 5 and eventually he decided to move to Chicago so that he had some motivation to see more patients.

Many different systems work and your works pretty well in many regards.
 

Back
Top Bottom