Ekologija

Air pollution may be damaging every organ and virtually every cell in the human body, according to a comprehensive new global review.

The research shows head-to-toe harm, from heart and lung disease to diabetes and dementia, and from liver problems and bladder cancer to brittle bones and damaged skin. Fertility, foetuses and children are also affected by toxic air, the review found.

The systemic damage is the result of pollutants causing inflammation that then floods through the body and ultrafine particles being carried around the body by the bloodstream.

Air pollution is a “public health emergency”, according to the World Health Organization, with more than 90% of the global population enduring toxic outdoor air. New analysis indicates 8.8m early deaths each year – double earlier estimates – making air pollution a bigger killer than tobacco smoking.

But the impact of different pollutants on many ailments remains to be established, suggesting well-known heart and lung damage is only “the tip of the iceberg”.

“Air pollution can harm acutely, as well as chronically, potentially affecting every organ in the body,” conclude the scientists from the Forum of International Respiratory Societies in the two review papers, published in the journal Chest. “Ultrafine particles pass through the [lungs], are readily picked up by cells, and carried via the bloodstream to expose virtually all cells in the body.”

Prof Dean Schraufnagel, at the University of Illinois at Chicago and who led the reviews, said: “I wouldn’t be surprised if almost every organ was affected. If something is missing [from the review] it is probably because there was no research yet.”

The review represents “very strong science”, said Dr Maria Neira, WHO director of public and environmental health: “It adds to the very heavy evidence we have already. There are more than 70,000 scientific papers to demonstrate that air pollution is affecting our health.”

She said she expected even more impacts of air pollution to be shown by future research: “Issues like Parkinson’s or autism, for which there is some evidence but maybe not the very strong linkages, that evidence is coming now.”

Odbranimo reke Stare planine  Vas poziva da kažemo NE finansiranju projekata MHE preko komercijalnih banaka. Okupimo se ispred Unikredit Banke u ul.Rajićeva br.27, Beograd

Pitanje otkuda Piralen je ovdje suvišno. Nije se rat vodio da se završi tek tako, pukim prestankom pucanja jednih na druge. Neće, čini se, završiti dok svi ne popucamo po šavovima koji u primirju u kojemu živimo sve više popuštaju i slabe kao i živci pa oboljevamo od tumora jer naša tijela pritisnu gumb za samodestrukciju obzirom više ne mogu podnositi mulj bosanskohercegovačke svakodnevice.

The Social Ideology of the Motorcar


Now, why is it that what is perfectly obvious in the case of the beaches is not generally acknowledged to be the case for transportation? Like the beach house, doesn't a car occupy scarce space? Doesn't it deprive the others who use the roads (pedestrians, cyclists, streetcar and bus drivers)? Doesn't it lose its use value when everyone uses his or her own? And yet there are plenty of politicians who insist that every family has the right to at least one car and that it's up to the "government" to make it possible for everyone to park conveniently, drive easily in the city, and go on holiday at the same time as everyone else, going 70 mph on the roads to vacation spots.

The monstrousness of this demagogic nonsense is immediately apparent, and yet even the left doesn't disdain resorting to it. Why is the car treated like a sacred cow? Why, unlike other "privative" goods, isn't it recognised as an antisocial luxury? The answer should be sought in the following two aspects of driving:

1.Mass motoring effects an absolute triumph of bourgeois ideology on the level of daily life. It gives and supports in everyone the illusion that each individual can seek his or her own benefit at the expense of everyone else. Take the cruel and aggressive selfishness of the driver who at any moment is figuratively killing the "others," who appear merely as physical obstacles to his or her own speed. This aggressive and competitive selfishness marks the arrival of universally bourgeois behaviour, and has come into being since driving has become commonplace. ("You'll never have socialism with that kind of people," an East German friend told me, upset by the spectacle of Paris traffic).

2.The automobile is the paradoxical example of a luxury object that has been devalued by its own spread. But this practical devaluation has not yet been followed by an ideological devaluation. The myth of the pleasure and benefit of the car persists, though if mass transportation were widespread its superiority would be striking. The persistence of this myth is easily explained. The spread of the private car has displaced mass transportation and altered city planning and housing in such a way that it transfers to the car functions which its own spread has made necessary. An ideological ("cultural") revolution would be needed to break this circle. Obviously this is not to be expected from the ruling class (either right or left).

Let us look more closely now at these two points.

C40 Cities, a network of 94 of the world’s biggest cities, released a report on Wednesday estimating how much consumption habits drive the climate crisis. The results were staggering: In those nearly 100 cities, where a combined 700 million live, the consumption of goods and services “including food, clothing, aviation, electronics, construction and vehicles” is responsible for 10 percent of global greenhouse gases. That’s nearly double the emissions from every building in the entire world.

If consumption-based emissions in those big cities continue on their current track, they will “nearly double between 2017 and 2050—from 4.5 gigatons to 8.4 gigatons per year,” the report says. That means the cities would not be able to achieve reductions necessary for the world to stay below 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, which the scientific community says is necessary to preserve a livable planet. In fact, they would use up their budget for that target in the next 14 years.There will be little incentive for businesses and governments to make these changes, however, if the people who support them—with dollars and votes, respectively—aren’t also making change a priority.

There will be little incentive for businesses and governments to make these changes, however, if the people who support them—with dollars and votes, respectively—aren’t also making change a priority.

“Individual consumers cannot change the way the global economy operates on their own, but many of the interventions proposed in this report rely on individual action,” the report reads. “It is ultimately up to individuals to decide what type of food to eat and how to manage their shopping to avoid household food waste. It is also largely up to individuals to decide how many new items of clothing to buy, whether they should own and drive a private car, and how many personal flights to take.”

“Individual consumers cannot change the way the global economy operates on their own, but many of the interventions proposed in this report rely on individual action,” the report reads. “It is ultimately up to individuals to decide what type of food to eat and how to manage their shopping to avoid household food waste. It is also largely up to individuals to decide how many new items of clothing to buy, whether they should own and drive a private car, and how many personal flights to take.”

S obzirom da je ovo prirodno dobro NAŠE vlasništvo, MI smo pravi poslodavci i zato želimo da znamo neke tokove novca, tj. sledeće:

Ko su kupci trupaca? Top 10 kupaca/pilana iz veleprodaje (avansno plaćanje) u protekle 3 godine?
Da li se kvalitetni trupci hrasta i bukve prodaju po ceni ogrevnog drveta? U čijem interesu? Ko uzima "razliku u kvalitetu?"
 Ko izvozi naše drvo i gde se izvozi i u kojim dilovima, ko gubi, a ko dobija?
Da li je Kina novo, top tržište, odnosno ugovoreni kupac na osnovu međudržavnog strateškog sporazuma? Oni nama plastiku, a mi njima drvne palete?

Kvartalni izveštaj o poslovanju kaže:
Posl.prihodi 65mil.din
- Prodaja proizvoda i usluga 40mil.din
- Ostali poslovni prihodi 22mil.din
- Ostalo "ostalo" 3mil.din
Posl. rashodi 63mil.din
- Troškovi zarada 30mil.din
- Troškovi proizvoda i usluga 19mil.din
- Ostali materijalni i nematerijalni tr.14mil.din

Mi građani smo svakako na gubitku jer gubimo šumu nacionalnog parka, šumu zaštićenog područja, a da li u ovim transakcijama gubi i samo preduzeće i sama država?
JPNPFG ima 138 zaposlenih + 1 ugovorenog savetnika! 
Ima tenderske nabavke raznih proizvoda i usluga na kojima učestvuje po 1 ponuđač! Nekoliko godina unazad jedni isti!
Poštovana Upravo, MI kao vaši poslodavci, jer upravljajte našim prirodnim dobrom, pitamo vas: Da li su vam svi ovi zaposleni potrebni za obavljanje vaše sporedne, šumarske delatnosti? Da li su cene ugovorenih usluga seče i nege šuma, realne, s obzirom da ponuđač "Mil gradnja" DOO Beočin nije imao konkurenciju na tenderu? Isto pitanje važi i za ugovorene dobavljače za gajenje šume, rasadnike, sadnice, nabavku jelena ?
Toliko zaposlenih, a među njima nema radnika, gajitelja šuma i radnika da vode rasadnik i proizvode sadnice?
Puno pitanja!
Istražujemo!

Gargantua wrote:

“Individual consumers cannot change the way the global economy operates on their own, but many of the interventions proposed in this report rely on individual action,” the report reads. “It is ultimately up to individuals to decide what type of food to eat and how to manage their shopping to avoid household food waste. It is also largely up to individuals to decide how many new items of clothing to buy, whether they should own and drive a private car, and how many personal flights to take.”

s obzirom na opšti društveni kontekst, sve što se nauči kroz škole i u društvu, okruženje, medije, uzore, načine lične afirmacije itd, ovo je potpuna besmislica, pogrešno usmeravanje društvene pažnje i manipulativno nabacivanje moralnog tereta običnom čoveku. 

naravno, sračunato je s tim da se ne menja ekonomski model ili da se menja u skladu sa uvreženim sistemskim informacijama (potrošači će da "kazne" neke firme koje će zato postati tržišni gubitnici, i sve je onda u redu jer će se s tim kalkulisati i svi ćemo se zajedno polagano i bez lomova uz očuvanje hijerarhije pomerati ka "ekološkijim" rešenjima). a u stvari akcija će biti nužna od vrha, i to temeljna, sa svim lomovima koji će uz to ići. kad tad, što pre to bolje.

Političari, javni službenici i koroporativni lobisti koji žive u dobrim kućama i zgradama u centralnom Nju Delhiju plaćaju vrlo malo da bi dobili neograničeno snabdevanje vodom iz vodovoda.

Bilo da se kupaju, peru sudove, psa ili auto, ili pak zalivaju negovani travnjak – za to im je potrebno da plate samo 10 do 15 dolara mesečno.

Ali kada se zakorači u neku od siromašnih četvrti u unutrašnjosti grada, ili u džinovska neplanski građena predgrađa, tu počinje svakodnevna borba da se nađu i plate vrlo ograničene količine dostupne vode, koja se češće dostavlja cisternama nego vodovodnim cevima. A cena raste kako se raspoložive zalihe smanjuju.