Over and over we hear politicians say they can't spend our tax dollars on environmental protection when the economy is so fragile.
If we want to address global warming along with the other environmental problems associated with our continued rush to burn our precious fossil fuels as quickly as possible we must learn to use our resources more wisely kick our addiction and quickly start turning to sources of energy that have fewer negative impacts.
From year to year environmental changes are incremental and often barely register in our lives but from evolutionary or geological perspectives what is happening is explosive change.
Beyond reducing individual use one of our top priorities must be to move from fossil fuels to energy that has fewer detrimental effects on water supplies and fewer environmental impacts overall.
All we can hope for is that the thing is going to slowly and imperceptibly shift. All I can say is that 50 years ago there were no such thing as environmental policies.
The environmental crisis arises from a fundamental fault: our systems of production - in industry agriculture energy and transportation - essential as they are make people sick and die.
I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth environmental protection improvements in our educational system.
At every turn when humanity is asked the question 'Do you want temporary economic gain or long-term environmental loss which one do you prefer' we invariably choose the money.
Architects in the past have tended to concentrate their attention on the building as a static object. I believe dynamics are more important: the dynamics of people their interaction with spaces and environmental condition.
I think Captain Cousteau might be the father of the environmental movement.
Earth Day 1970 was irrefutable evidence that the American people understood the environmental threat and wanted action to resolve it.
For me going vegan was an ethical and environmental decision. I'm doing the right thing by the animals.
People in Slow Food understand that food is an environmental issue.
Under the Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star Program homes are independently verified to be measurably more energy efficient than average houses.
The Endangered Species Act is the strongest and most effective tool we have to repair the environmental harm that is causing a species to decline.
We learned that economic growth and environmental protection can and should go hand in hand.
Liberals in Congress have spent the past three decades pandering to environmental extremists. The policies they have put in place are in large part responsible for the energy crunch we are seeing today. We have not built a refinery in this country for 30 years.
Pushing production out of America to nations without our environmental standards increases global environmental risks.
If the federal government had been around when the Creator was putting His hand to this state Indiana wouldn't be here. It'd still be waiting for an environmental impact statement.
A very Faustian choice is upon us: whether to accept our corrosive and risky behavior as the unavoidable price of population and economic growth or to take stock of ourselves and search for a new environmental ethic.
I have a private plane. But I fly commercial when I go to environmental conferences.
I've used the prestige and influence of having been a president of the United States as effectively as possible. And secondly I've still been able to carry out my commitments to peace and human rights and environmental quality and freedom and democracy and so forth.
I always thought we had an environmental problem but I hadn't realized how urgent it was. James Lovelock writes that by the end of this century there will be one billion people left.
Economists treat economics as if it is a pure science divorced from the facts of life. The result of this false accountancy is a willful confusion under cover of which industry wreaks its havoc scot-free and ignores the environmental cost.
There are two problems for our species' survival - nuclear war and environmental catastrophe - and we're hurtling towards them. Knowingly.
I believe we should reframe our response to climate change as an imperative for growth rather than merely being a way of being green or meeting environmental commitments.
In the environmental movement every time you lose a battle it's for good but our victories always seem to be temporary and we keep fighting them over and over again.
This is absolutely bizarre that we continue to subsidize highways beyond the gasoline tax airlines and we don't subsidize we don't want to subsidize a national rail system that has environmental impact.
I don't see this planet being they're talking about how they're turning around the environmental problems here but I think it's already too late.
Advertising is an environmental striptease for a world of abundance.
Nature is not simply a technical or economical resource and human beings are not mere numbers. To suggest that one can somehow align all the squabbling institutions of science environmental management government and diplomacy in an alliance of convenience to regulate the global climate seems to me optimistic.
Energy and environmental regulation transportation and broadband policy all benefit when legislators have a basic grounding in the technical concepts behind business models products and innovation.