In the 60s, 70s or even in the 80s when people have to choose between development and environment the answer will always be the development. The argument those days were very simple, you need to sacrifice in order to develop and to fulfill the endless needs of human being. The basic needs of foods required lots of land to be cleared and turned into agriculture plot to produce foods. The basic needs of shelter required massive land to be cleared so that houses can be built. To make human beings life become easier, tools such as cars and electronic equipments have been invented to fulfill the endless neccessities of human being.
However, it is worth noting here that while the population consume the energy of the earth, new technologies were produced every day to minimise the effect of these 'life saving apparatus' towards the environment. Thus, the buzz word of green technology or the environmental friendly technology has become a daily vocub in the society. It seems a necessary nowadays that every products offered to the population/consumer should be labelled 'environmental friendly product' it is akin to the label of 'halal' product to the muslim. So, my point here is that there is and there will always be a way of creating and producing something for the human being which will bring minimal if not zero effect to the environment. And, to make it more interesting, it was proven!
Now, back to the real issue..today it was reported in a local newspaper (Daily Express) that in order to overcome the shortage of power supply in Sabah the people of Sabah did not have choice but to accept that a coal-fired power plant that has been rejected before will now proceed. And, this solution was coming out from our very own prime minister who promised that 'people will be his first priority'. Well, it is indeed very true that if people want uniterrupted power supply then people need to accept coal-fired power plant is the only answer. If this reason were given out in the 60s,70s or 80s then we will not have problem with it. Ironically, the same reason was again used in this so called 21st century where all the alternatives, environmental friendly technologies is available.
why resort to the short term measure and ignoring the long term effect of this solution. Am sure our very own PM know and well aware about this but WHY he still to choose the short term measure? I've been attending countless leadership courses and seminars and all these courses and seminars emphasising that it is very important for a very good leader to think of long term effect rather than short term gain. In this case, it is very clear that our leader choose short term solution over long term negative effect. So you decide.
The hydro-power of Bakun in nearby state of Sarawak was said to have the capacity to generate more than enough power supply to the whole country. And, yet when a suggestion was put forward to the government that Sabah should be connected with this vast power supply it was rejected citing the reason of very high cost. You see, again the short term measured were used rather than the long-term effect.
Am so saddened and feel sorry for all my fellow sabahan who fought hard not to have the coal-fired power plant in order to give the future malaysian sabahan better environment to live on. It seems that your fight and struggle for the environment worth nothing in the name of development and in the name of power.
However, it is worth noting here that while the population consume the energy of the earth, new technologies were produced every day to minimise the effect of these 'life saving apparatus' towards the environment. Thus, the buzz word of green technology or the environmental friendly technology has become a daily vocub in the society. It seems a necessary nowadays that every products offered to the population/consumer should be labelled 'environmental friendly product' it is akin to the label of 'halal' product to the muslim. So, my point here is that there is and there will always be a way of creating and producing something for the human being which will bring minimal if not zero effect to the environment. And, to make it more interesting, it was proven!
Now, back to the real issue..today it was reported in a local newspaper (Daily Express) that in order to overcome the shortage of power supply in Sabah the people of Sabah did not have choice but to accept that a coal-fired power plant that has been rejected before will now proceed. And, this solution was coming out from our very own prime minister who promised that 'people will be his first priority'. Well, it is indeed very true that if people want uniterrupted power supply then people need to accept coal-fired power plant is the only answer. If this reason were given out in the 60s,70s or 80s then we will not have problem with it. Ironically, the same reason was again used in this so called 21st century where all the alternatives, environmental friendly technologies is available.
why resort to the short term measure and ignoring the long term effect of this solution. Am sure our very own PM know and well aware about this but WHY he still to choose the short term measure? I've been attending countless leadership courses and seminars and all these courses and seminars emphasising that it is very important for a very good leader to think of long term effect rather than short term gain. In this case, it is very clear that our leader choose short term solution over long term negative effect. So you decide.
The hydro-power of Bakun in nearby state of Sarawak was said to have the capacity to generate more than enough power supply to the whole country. And, yet when a suggestion was put forward to the government that Sabah should be connected with this vast power supply it was rejected citing the reason of very high cost. You see, again the short term measured were used rather than the long-term effect.
Am so saddened and feel sorry for all my fellow sabahan who fought hard not to have the coal-fired power plant in order to give the future malaysian sabahan better environment to live on. It seems that your fight and struggle for the environment worth nothing in the name of development and in the name of power.
No comments:
Post a Comment