Like it or not, there is a lot of spending going on under the guise of "getting the economy going, once again". As environmental professionals, there are probably a number of reasons we should support the notion that if money is going to be spent, it might as well be spent in areas that support our personal and professional goals.
Yes, our kids may be paying for it well into their adult lives (if you believe in that argument), but at least they may be living longer, breathing more healthy air and consuming healthier food and water. They may also see cleaner energy and less dependence on a foreign oil supply.
There may be far reaching implications of the energy policy being crafted in Washington, DC:
Congress to pass energy bill this year: White House
By now, we should all have our views on environmental and green stimulus money. How does that support your professional and personal agenda? These are questions that may not have easy answers, but at least there is likelihood that there will be more projects with which we may become involved.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Hi Brendan,
I am currently a site remediation consultant. My personal agenda and my professional agenda are very different.
Personally, I do not believe that global warming has been documented to be caused by man' actions. In fact, I do not believe that there is a current global warming trend. However, if clients would like me to assist them with reduction in so called greenhouse gases or other emissions, I will be happy to paid to assist them.
Now, that does not mean that I do not believe we should be wasteful of resources. I do think that resource management and conservation is a worthwhile endeavour.
Hi Tom,
Thanks for reading. I appreciate your comment and I certainly understand your sentiments.
I wonder if you can really say your personal agenda differs so much from your professional agenda when it comes to the short term (by this, I mean one human life span) health issues encountered in harmful environments.
For example let's take port cities with high diesel emissions causing higher rates of asthma (Long Beach, CA). Or Hexavalent chromium in groundwater (a'la Erin Brokovich) causing birth defects.
My point is, Green does not necessarily have to mean saving planet earth, although people do argue they go hand-in-hand.
I have to agree on at least one point: for whatever the motivation, I am happy to provide a service for which I can be paid!
Thanks again for your thoughts. Please feel free to comment anytime.
Post a Comment