Actually some sense from the BBC Science and Environment site:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The irony of the green revolution is that we - at least for the medium to short term - need a supply of new metals mined out of the ground," says Prof Richard Herrington, head of earth sciences at London’s Natural History Museum.
He believes an urgent conversation is needed to assess where and how these minerals are extracted.
"Ideally, we should work towards a circular economy where we just recycle the metals we use. But at this moment in time, we can't do that. It's just that the growth is too fast, it's too rapid.
"And to hit the target of net zero, we need those technologies now, so I think it's inevitable we will continue mining."
But mining in the future will have to be different, to minimise and repair any environmental damage.
"What we really need to do is make sure that mining can be done in a sustainable way, so that the legacy isn't a scarred landscape, isn't something that is causing problems for the population and for the ecosystem."
A green revolution is pointless, Prof Herrington argues, unless the planet is protected in the process.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-57534978
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what I have been saying for a long time. We need to think carefully about our consumption of finite natural resources but as ever the Green Movement seems to think that they and the money supply are infinite.
Some of the ‘Green’ views are given in these two short interviews, one is with a founder of Greenpeace international, the other with the founder of XR.
