David Attenborough and many others would disagree.

Yet there are people who still believe the answers to
our environmental problems are not to be found in
science.

Some of the most eminent economists, psychologists,
and philosophers have made clear what should be most obvious,
we don't become happier if life is led in search of the next
material object, in conspicuous consumption.

Scientists know that pollution, resource degradation, and all
sorts of negative environmental impacts come at a genuine cost
to society - usually not to all of society, but significant
parts of it.

One person's free disposal of toxic waste
is another person's
cost. That cost could be severe and
life-threatening, as with water-borne
diseases and particular air-pollutants.

Appealing to our professionals and philosophers is one thing but
its up to us as global citizens who need to put aside our
narrow self-interests and work together
if there is to be a world for those humans
and other animals who follow us

"David Attenborough and many others would disagree."

With what specifically?

David Attenborough says lots of things, only some of which is true.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IatVKZZcPG0&t=625s

"we don't become happier if life is led in search of the next
material object,"

Did anyone ask the actual people what they though would make them happier? Or are they too stupid to know what makes them happy?

Life, liberty and the pursuit of what others think is happiness. The inversion of democracy.

The fact is that the environment is doing just fine in those places with the greatest wealth. Forests are declining in backward areas and increasing in advanced areas. Pollution is declining in advanced areas but growing in backward areas - 90% of ocean pollution comes from just 10 rivers all of which are in economically disadvantaged regions.

Want to save the environment? then support, cheer for economic advancement.

Bjorn Lomborg summed it up perfectly 20 years ago. The major concern of the poor is getting food and shelter. Once that is achieved then, and only then, but equally inevitably, they want to improve their living conditions. ie "Now that I'm well feed and sheltered, I'd like to cough less".

Deforestation, the loss of trees and other vegetation
can cause climate change, desertification, soil erosion,
flooding, fewer crops, increased greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere and a host of problems for indigenous people.

Our rivers, reservoirs, lakes and seas are drowning in
chemicals, waste, plastic, and other pollutants. Some
80% of the world's waste water is dumped largely
untreated back into the environment polluting rivers,
lakes and oceans.

Koalas are listed as a vulnerable species in NSW,
Queensland, and the ACT under the federal government
classification - prompting a review to check
how close they are to extinction in the wild amid
widespread habitat loss from land clearing and
increasing impacts from climate change, bushfires,
heatwaves and droughts.

That will do for now.

BTW: Many can survive without money or love.
But none without water.

So Foxy, are you going to just ignore the fact that the UN says Australia is reforesting not deforesting?

Mhaze,

Re the first figure re deforestation try this:

"Globally we deforest around ten million hectares of forest every year."

http://ourworldindata.org/deforestation

Whilst one can also consider replanting etc, planting a few trees and shrubs here and there to make up for deforestation to simply reduce the impacts of such a practice isn't good. I would argue to save the forests in their natural state and not destroy them in the first place. Secondly, any type of replantings assume that every plant, tree, shrub etc. put in as a replacement will survive and that is not always be the case. I mean planted trees do need to be looked after. They're not trees that have grown, developed or generated by themselves.

In terms of the detail re Koalas and the 80% figure, that came from here:

"Since European settlement, approximately 80% of Koala habitat has been decimated".

http://www.savethekoala.com/about-koalas/koala-habitat/

Re drying rivers and water use, please visit the following. Just one example, including a short video.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/partner-content-australia-water-problem

There is other content I could put here re water use, drying rivers and associated matters but there would be a lot. I can add some later on, depending on the discussion.

You either have the option to be part of the problem or be part of the solution - and can you provide at least one example on how people can better connect with mother nature? Such a question is of course open to interpretation, that being what one considers mother nature to be of course.