China's environment: An economic death sentence

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2013/01/28/china-environment-economic-fallout/

The Chinese government should put the economic growth and political concern to one side. China needs to concentrate on saving and improving the environment. The article above says that 700,000 people die a year because of the poisonous air. China should try to save its people first. If all the workers die now, China will have no labor force, and they won't earn anything. So, why not try to save the people? China will continue to grow as long as there are human resources. The government should think farther ahead rather than concentrating on getting the benefit in front of them. The government can spend money cleaning up the environment and save the workers. It's true that China will be spending a lot of money on the environment, but it can gain more benefit later on. Workers need to be in good health conditions to work. This issue puts Chinese workers' life on the line. If the government doesn't take action soon, this problem could become a political problem.

America's greenest  airlines

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2013/09/airline-fuel-efficiency?zid=313&ah=fe2aac0b11adef572d67aed9273b6e55

Burning less fuel is better for the environment, and it also increases the Airline's profit. An airline can make more money if it improves its technology that burns less fuel. It would also reduce the damage of the environment. Gases insulate the planet and could lead to big changed in earth's climate. It would be awesome if we can use fuel efficiently. We can save money and keep the earth green; we also save natural resources. It takes years for fuel to form; it's considered scare. With that being said, fuel companies would not be happy. They would be losing profit because they would be selling less fuel. The might try to rise the prices or do something in order to increase their profit.

 Trees of knowledge

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21585096-how-brazil-using-education-technology-and-politics-save-its-rainforest-trees?zid=313&ah=fe2aac0b11adef572d67aed9273b6e55

Saving the rainforest is an awesome thing to do. I believe that trees are important to humans in producing oxygen and keep the air clean. Trees also keep the soil from being washed away during flood or natural disasters. Trees are what made the Earth the Green Planet. Seeing the deforestation decreasing is comforting. We also use trees in producing goods; for instance, paper is the first good we think of when talking about trees. I think having more trees at a time like this would make a big difference because they can help clean the polluted environment. There are tons of people who want to improve the environment but coming up with something is sometimes out of reach. After reading this article, I think people can put their hands together and clean the environment up by planting more trees and keep the planet green. Scientists should invent more technology to help reduce deforestation.

Smother my neighbor

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/09/interstate-pollution?zid=313&ah=fe2aac0b11adef572d67aed9273b6e55

I like the idea of cleaning and reducing emissions that could travel long distance and harm people from other states. Everyone likes to live in a clean environment but most people are damaging the environment without knowing. Companies often put their own benefits over the environment. I'm sure to a company profit comes first. Most of them would rather be making money than spending money cleaning the environment. When companies refuse to help clean the environment, the state governments would have to step in but would they really try to work it out? States get money from tax which is paid by companies. The country government can't control every single state or tell them what to do if they don't show the consequences of the actions. If we reduce the pollution then we don't have to spend as much to clean it up but for those companies that would be a bad idea. Now, they would have to try to reduce the pollution which can cause the ability to produce goods and services. Then deflation would occur and everyone would suffer. I would rather pay a little more to buy goods and services than paying thousands of dollars for hospital bills if I catch some kind of disease from the pollution. I think the companies and states should put another thought into this because for people who get healthcare from the government, the states pay the cost for them.