Gene Green Quotes

I think the greatest challenge in environmentalism and the most rewarding challenge is trying to figure out how humans can meet their needs while protecting the environment.

Indeed, the economy and the environment need not be seen in opposition.

The premise is simple: One economy and one environment, and they're interdependent.

Every time we try to do something to improve the environment someone predicts that it will ruin the economy.

It should be noted that the EPA's banning of methanol is categorically absurd from the point of view of environmental protection.

By adopting the control strategy, the nation's environmental program has created a built-in antagonism between environmental quality and economic growth.

For the record, I am sticking with my claim that the simultaneous degradation of air quality, water quality, water supply, food safety, soil quality, and other environment-related variables is the main challenge to China's continued development.

We really need to kick the carbon habit and stop making our energy from burning things. Climate change is also really important. You can wreck one rainforest then move, drain one area of resources and move onto another, but climate change is global.

It's hardly surprising that the corporate aliens lie when it comes to the relationship between doing something about climate change and the economy.

This whole idea that we address environmental issues by not doing stuff just doesn't work.

In the end, I think the majority of Romanian society will understand that if we respect environmental protection standards, if we have benefits in taxes, royalties, jobs, we should do what all the modern countries in Europe and beyond are doing to take advantage of their natural resources.

We have to preserve it and use it sustainably. And the short-term use of resources at the destruction of the long-term heritage of this country is not a policy that we can pursue.

I'm not in favor of just taking short-term isolated situations and depleting our resources to keep our climate just the way it is today.

My role is not to choose between safeguarding the economy and protecting the environment - it's about doing both.

What we've proven is that you can protect the environment, use it wisely and grow the economy and that there is no conflict between the two.

Climate change is destroying our path to sustainability. Ours is a world of looming challenges and increasingly limited resources. Sustainable development offers the best chance to adjust our course.

The crusade to convince us that global warming can only be dealt with by wealth destruction and higher energy prices began with an effort to 'raise awareness,' which turned into some delicate nanny-state prodding before efforts to artificially inflate prices.

Indeed, our particular concept of private property, which deters us from exhausting the positive resources of the earth, favors pollution.

To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed.

You can listen to them [environmental protesters] but don’t stop your project—don’t stop your thinking.

What’s been going on for years is political science, not good science in the environmental area.

Conservation is not without a cost.

The free market should not include the right to pollute our environment.

They go together, a strong environment and a strong economy. In Florida the environment is the economy.

Government Enviornmental poisitions are tradeoffs. In that process, Democrats tend to worry more about the harm done to the enviornment and the health of the people; Republicans tend to worry more about harm to business and the economy.