Usually, environmental programs are not designed for a mainstream audience.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
This whole idea that we address environmental issues by not doing stuff just doesn't work.
Indeed, the economy and the environment need not be seen in opposition.
Perhaps the time has come to cease calling it the 'environmentalist' view, as though it were a lobbying effort outside the mainstream of human activity, and to start calling it the real-world view.
Why should we not expect self-designated environmental leaders to practice what they preach?
Environmentalism has failed.
You can only get really unpopular decisions through if the electorate is convinced of the value of the environment. That's what natural history programmes should be for.
I am very concerned that federal and state air quality programs do not consider public health in regulating certain classes of industrial air emissions.
The position I took at the time was that we hadn't really examined any of the potential environmental consequences of introducing genetically modified organisms.
Growing Greener doesn't produce money for farmland preservation or open space preservation.
Natures' curriculum cannot be changed.