Dear Prof Mitra,

It is an ethical responsibility to ensure a healthy environment for future generations and therefore there must be a balance between developement and environmental degradation. 

According to attached link, None of the world’s top industries would be profitable if they paid for the natural capital they use. Therefore, in a long-term horizon, we are sacrificing the environment and future generations.

The notion of “externalities” has become familiar in environmental circles. It refers to costs imposed by businesses that are not paid for by those businesses. For instance, industrial processes can put pollutants in the air that increase public health costs, but the public, not the polluting businesses, picks up the tab. In this way, businesses privatize profits and publicize costs.

According to the report, Of the top 20 region-sectors ranked by environmental impacts, none would be profitable if environmental costs were fully integrated. 

UNEP report makes clear that what’s going on today is more than a few accounting oversights here and there. The distance between today’s industrial systems and truly sustainable industrial systems — systems that do not spend down stored natural capital but instead integrate into current energy and material flows — is not one of degree, but one of kind

.Best regards

Behrouz

http://grist.org/business-technology/none-of-the-worlds-top-industries-would-be-profitable-if-they-paid-for-the-natural-capital-they-use/

Dear Prof Mitra,

It is an ethical responsibility to ensure a healthy environment for future generations and therefore there must be a balance between developement and environmental degradation. 

According to attached link, None of the world’s top industries would be profitable if they paid for the natural capital they use. Therefore, in a long-term horizon, we are sacrificing the environment and future generations.

The notion of “externalities” has become familiar in environmental circles. It refers to costs imposed by businesses that are not paid for by those businesses. For instance, industrial processes can put pollutants in the air that increase public health costs, but the public, not the polluting businesses, picks up the tab. In this way, businesses privatize profits and publicize costs.

According to the report, Of the top 20 region-sectors ranked by environmental impacts, none would be profitable if environmental costs were fully integrated. 

UNEP report makes clear that what’s going on today is more than a few accounting oversights here and there. The distance between today’s industrial systems and truly sustainable industrial systems — systems that do not spend down stored natural capital but instead integrate into current energy and material flows — is not one of degree, but one of kind

.Best regards

Behrouz

http://grist.org/business-technology/none-of-the-worlds-top-industries-would-be-profitable-if-they-paid-for-the-natural-capital-they-use/

Dear Abhijit:

I think there are people who actually think only about short-term gains , because ultimately the cost will be paid by future generations. But this is combined with the fact that it is difficult and expensive to radically change many economic activities that today are based on an unsustainable exploitation of the environment. That's why scientists, NGOs , politicians and multilateral agencies are who have the primary responsibility to promote and enforce environmental protection .

Industrial wastes pollutes drinking-water supplies or poison plants and animals

http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/wasting_resources/waste_pollution_rev4.shtml&ei=AosKjPqX&lc=en-IN&s=1&m=202&host=www.google.co.in&ts=1462410194&sig=APY536yalrlKFiWNq7OeWszFpQVYrw4lwQ

Estoy de acuerdo con el contenido implícito en la pregunta

Por la importancia del tema que nos ocupa, me permito enviar mi respuesta en dos idiomas, el oficial de mi país México (Español) y el de consenso actualmente para la difusión científica (Inglés).

Por supuesto que estamos vendiendo nuestro futuro y de nuestros hijos y demás descendientes, por aceptar las migajas de un "ingreso aparentemente rentable" a corto plazo, dañando y aniquilando en el presenta la riqueza de nuestros ecosistemas (los que todavía existen) a cambio de tener una tierra seca, pobre, árida e inhóspita para la vida humana en el futuro.

Todo esto deriva en gran parte de cuatro factores:

a) Economía de libre mercado con enriquecimiento de las personas que acumulan con voracidad grandes capitales (minoría en proporción a toda la población mundial) a costa de la pobreza personal, física, biológica y ecológica (contexto, entorno) de los que menos tienen.

b) Pensamiento de corto alcance "cortoplacista" de quienes quieren disfrutar y tener todo lo que se pueda, en esta vida, sin pensar en la herencia de pobreza y falta de humanidad para las generaciones futuras. Incluso poniendo en riesgo la existencia de la tierra y del Homo sapiens (en caso de que sea próspera y se generalice la economía de guerra)

c) Aprovechamiento y abuso de capitalistas, políticos, empleadores y empresarios, del hambre de los que menos tienen (pobres en patrimonio, salud y sustento) quienes aceptan las migajas (comida) y limosna (dinero) de hoy, para comer o comprar comida para hoy, sin pensar en el mañana, sólo terminar este día y vivir un día mas.

d) Corrupción de funcionarios y gobernadores que autorizan mediante cierto incentivo, el asentamiento de "Industrias Sucias" en un vergel o paraíso ecológico, aún a sabiendas, del daño que están haciendo a esa población y a ese ecosistema.

Saludos a todos los participantes de la discusión en este foro y al promotor/ moderador del mismo.

Atentamente

Dr. José Luis García Vigil

I agree with the implicit content in question

Because of the importance of the issue at hand, I would send my answer in two languages, the official of my country Mexico (Spanish) and the current consensus for scientific dissemination (English).

Of course we are selling our future and our children and other descendants, to accept the crumbs of a "seemingly profitable income" in the short term, damaging and destroying the presents the richness of our ecosystems (which still exist) in exchange for have a dry, poor, arid and inhospitable to human life in the future earth.

All this stems largely from four factors:

a) Free market economy with enrichment of people who accumulate voraciously large capital (minority in proportion to the entire world population) at the expense of personal, physical, biological and ecological poverty (context, environment) of those who have less.

b) Thought of "short-sighted" short reach of those who want to enjoy and have everything you can, in this life, without thinking about the legacy of poverty and lack of humanity for future generations. Even threatening the existence of land and Homo sapiens (if that is prosperous and widespread war economy).

c) Use and abuse of capitalists, politicians, employers and entrepreneurs, hunger of the poor people (poor in wealth, health and livelihood) who accept the crumbs (food) and alms (money) today, to eat or buy food today, without thinking about tomorrow, just end this day and live another day.

d) Corruption of officials and governors who authorized through some incentive, the settlement of "Dirty Industries" in a garden or ecological paradise, even knowing, the damage they are doing to this population and the ecosystem.

Greetings to all participants of the discussion in this forum and promoter / moderator of it.

Sincerely

Dr. Jose Luis Garcia Vigil

I see the problem in each nations culture. If there is demand, you usually have supply.

 Almost No one wants to not have a car, and bike instead, if possible. This is in spite of massive car jams in big urban centers, the cost of gasoline, upkeep, patent plates, etc., and not to be left out greenhouse effect.

In Sweden I have seen university students massively arive in bikes., not usa or argentina. Even Sweden is not perfect, the paper mills cause pollution, that is why they moved to Uruguay.

Poorest of poor are always the worst sufferer.

Really, it is a growing problem in this century in almost everywhere!!!!!

Money isn’t everything – or is it? To most corporations, making a profit is goal number one – but some of those companies take it way too far, sacrificing the health of the planet and its inhabitants for a bigger bank balance. Far too many corporations turn a blind eye to the consequences of their destructive, exploitative practices. The worst of them are committing atrocities that go beyond the realm of objectionable into criminal, dumping toxic chemicals without regard to public health and employing child labor.

http://eco-chick.com/2009/05/3845/profits-before-people/

People in world have increased their needs, and therefore the environment is paying for it. But the environment which is being polluted more and more, will return the outputs to the human at a time. Actually, we are being affected at present also. But the future environment will be more polluted.

We can travel in trains and buses, but we choose cars. We can live without air-conditioners, but we need it. There are voluminous goods and articles, without which we can live.

Why we people determine only governments to be responsible. Can we vote to those leaders who ask to live without such assets and splendor.

The human being has forgot that it is also a component of the bio-system.

Of course, we are selling it. Businessmen  never think they are going to die, and do not have any sense of humanity or  transcendence. They should understand these Homer’s words:

As is the generation of leaves, so to of men:

At one time the wind shakes the leaves to the ground

but then the flourishing woods

Gives birth, and the season of spring comes

into existence;

So it is with the generations of men, which

alternately come forth and pass away.

– Homer, The Illiad, Book Six

I am afraid that is an appalling truth, especially in my home country. People won't care about the wellfare of their future generations, they only focus on making profits on the price of pollution of all kinds, and according to investigation of the state agencies 80% of underground water in my country is unfit for drinking!!!

Yes-we are about to sell

Yes, because humans tend to estimate short-term need to educate and create incentives to convince remote expected benefits against the immediate. Unfortunately, the environment, the relative benefits are too long a period for weighing too heavily on decision-making.

absolutely correct

its like nature of nasty dj

yes we have been half sold

Yes, most of us have short future, and those who profit have even less.

It takes some time for dirty corporations (who only know how to count money) to realize their priorities have deprived the rest of us of clean air and we are vulnerable to extreme weather phenomena that they have promoted due to their monkey-size brains (acquired from their limited activities).

we are gradually loosing our morality

Dear Prof Mitra,

According to Mrs. Brunland "the sustainable develoment is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".

Dear colleague, you have asked to me/us "Are we selling our future for dirty short term profitable industry?". Based in what request sustainable development and what is in reality, I agree totally with you, given to us through your question ... I'm sorry ... reality everywhere, where we get in contact with these bad, very bad actions, so, selling our future for dirty short term profitable industry, and not only with industry ... the same situation is in agricultyre, forestry etc. Without fear I can say, we are compromising the ability of today and future generations to meet their own needs ...

Who is against I am so able to be in front his/her/them with facts, and my final opinion is: with these bad, very bad actions we are compromising the ability of the present one and step by step the future generations to meet their own needs ... , ...

Tourism Industry

The process of uglification through insensitive development for mass tourism, and the destruction of natural environments and townscapes, have demonstrated vividly the limits to sustainability.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-10-09/news/9610090301_1_tourism-insensitive-affordable-projects

Dear all 

there are few people who actually believe only with short-term gains and loking for the others.

Regards

Raid