Louis C.K. explains it very (and explicitly) well about how humans have viewed their relationship with the environment. Viewer discretion is advised. There is definitely inappropriate language being used, but in this context, it is justified.
We deserve better indicators of societal well-being that extend beyond mere economic growth.
It would be impossible to live without water. Yet, in our mad rush to extract and sell every drop of gas and oil as quickly as possible, we’re trading precious water for fossil fuels.
All nuclear power remains expensive, unwieldy and difficult to integrate with intermittent renewables – and carries risks for weapons proliferation. But if the choice is between keeping nuclear power facilities running or shutting them down and replacing them with coal-fired power plants, the nuclear option is best for the climate.
Pete Seeger was a great communicator for whom principles mattered more than anything else. He was a true American and world citizen and we’re better off for the contributions he made during his long life.
The question isn’t about whether to use rail or pipelines. It’s about how to reduce our need for both.
Our Constitution doesn’t mention the environment. How can we fully enjoy our freedoms without the right to live in a healthy environment?
Human rights are vulnerable at a time when governments aggressively promote the interests of corporations over a healthy environment.
When it comes to climate change, our future will not be determined by chance but by choice. We can choose to ignore the science, or we can change our ways and reduce carbon emissions and our dependence on fossil fuels.