Addisumbria
17-05-2007, 14:15
I want to protect my environment, but I also need an economic boost, so I'm thinking about going with option number 3 on the Uranium Mining issue which says:
"There's no need for an either-or decision," says the government's Minister for Mining, Clear-Felling, and the Environment. "We can preserve most of the rainforest and allow mining of a small part. After all, think of all the good that the money from this uranium deposit can bring to Addisumbria."
**As opposed to the two other options: Destroy the whole rainforest to allow mining, or allow no mining at all.
Does anybody think this would NOT be the right decision for what I'm trying to do? I mean, is it actually going to help my ecomony?
I appreciate any help you could offer.
"There's no need for an either-or decision," says the government's Minister for Mining, Clear-Felling, and the Environment. "We can preserve most of the rainforest and allow mining of a small part. After all, think of all the good that the money from this uranium deposit can bring to Addisumbria."
**As opposed to the two other options: Destroy the whole rainforest to allow mining, or allow no mining at all.
Does anybody think this would NOT be the right decision for what I'm trying to do? I mean, is it actually going to help my ecomony?
I appreciate any help you could offer.