It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is enough being done to prevent environmental disasters?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 2 2010 @ 12:11 AM
Oil has started washing ashore on the US Gulf Coast from a leaking offshore well, the US Coast Guard has said. Is the right action being taken to tackle the crisis?

Up to 5,000 barrels of oil a day are thought to be spilling into the water after last week's explosion on a BP-operated rig, which then sank.

A state of emergency has been declared in Louisiana and President Barack Obama has pledged "every single available resource" to help. The US navy has been deployed to help avert a looming environmental disaster.

Are you affected by the oil slick, or have you seen it spreading? What measures should be taken to reduce the number of environmental disasters?

Let's here what all of you have to say about this catastrophe..

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 01:48 PM
I feel the environment/ nature will always be under-valued. Looking after the environment doesn't produce as much instant or as much money as all the activities that violate the earth, such as open cast mining, oil drilling etc. It is also cheaper for companies to just go in and take what they want, rather than put in the necessary safety nets.

Unless nature pays for itself (e.g. tourism or something like that), it will always come second place to human "development", wants, needs and greed.

On another thought:
Humans don't know enough about the environment to start playing around with it. How often has a man-caused disaster happened, and the remedial action has been worse than the disaster? Or how often has man said that any particular activity is harmless and will have no effect on the environment, only to have this activity come and bit him in the rear-end a few years down the line?

People seem to forget that the Earth is mostly a closed system - what happens in one area of the planet will eventually effect something/one else on the planet.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 02:24 PM
'Prevent' environmental disasters?
Last I heard, everyone was still in the "what do we do after it happens" stage?
Besides, with all the power elite controlling the weather & investing in weather modification technology, I hardly think PREVENTING natural catastrophes is in the cards. I'm sure this kind of technology wouldn't make NEARLY enough money. Causing havoc has proven to bring in boat loads of riches & rewards.

Seriously though, I'm sure there are people, who want to prevent death & destruction, that are quietly working to develop this technology, but I'd bet you my last piece of legal American tender that this technology won't be in the mainstream until it's time to clean up from some global natural distaster.

Just imagine if all the Nazi scientists from Project Paperclip had all been working towards humanitarian/environmental goals?
What a sweet world this would have been!

new topics

log in