Environmental protection from an economic perspective (1

The environment has never been for us an obsession or a matter that has its fate and its reckoning until a person whose heart is full of love for his homeland and full of jealousy about his nature, facilities, features, landmarks, monuments and legacy has emerged for it, namely His Royal Highness Prince Muhammad bin Salman, Crown Prince and Deputy Prime Minister – May God preserve him – and to be one of the pioneers of this great and far-reaching humanitarian work, and in a time when we – the sons of this vast happy kingdom – are urgently needed to reflect on our environment and its security and conservation as a result of the transformations and changes it undergoes due to the nature of the present life in which we live and what is in it. economic, social, industrial and technical developments. That is why the “Green Saudi Arabia” and “Green Middle East” initiatives have emerged; To care for the environment and pay attention to the aesthetics, appearance, sustainability and protection against the dangers of pollution, deterioration and extinction. This article provides a definition of the environment and what it is and how it relates to the obsession of man in his life and existence in the present era, what risks he may face and wish for, and the reflection of those risks of an economic vision.

The environment is embodied in all the various phenomena that surround man and his life in this universe, the most important of which are land, land, air and water. The environment, in terms of its development, development, protection and conservation of its natural and economic resources and components, is a global concern shared by most (if not all) countries of the world in our time. The problems of the environment and the thinking of finding solutions to them have long since emerged on a global level, and if there are many of those problems, but in the end they heal in one picture and meet in one frame, related to the ground on which we are located, the atmosphere in which we live, the air we breathe and the water we drink And the economic resources on which we depend on God in our lives and our existence. As for the natural risks that can be seen on the environment, it is those conditions or factors that are destroying the economy or causing damage to people and other elements of life in which they live. Under those conditions are those that are beyond the control or control of man himself, such as fluctuating weather phenomena, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, droughts, desertification, hurricanes and fires. As for those for which a person is normally responsible and within the scope of his control and control, it is, for example, limited to water pollution and air pollution, as well as improper and sanitary disposal of waste and toxic waste, as well as risks associated with failure in parts that manufactured in the environment for life, such as the collapse of buildings and the collapse of bridges, as well as the disposal of improper and organized hazardous substances such as radioactive medical materials and toxic electronic waste, or the release of chemical gases, whether from cars, trains , ships or aircraft due to collision, capsize, explosion or fire.

The distinction between natural and human disasters that occur in the environment is useful to draw attention to and limit to how to address, control and manage these disasters and avoid their risks or at least their human, material and moral mitigate consequences, but how are these disasters measured by standard criteria? There are two ways, the first is through the ground impact and measures the dimensions of the disaster with the magnitude of energy, and the second criterion looks at the effects and tries to measure them, and the difference between these two criteria leads to two scales achieved to measure the severity and impact of natural disasters means first to measure the natural occurrence of the land and try to know it by size or energy. The other one tries to identify the impact these disasters have and then sets out to measure. The difference between these two methods can be identified in the light of the two scales reached to measure earthquakes. The Richter scale measures earthquakes in terms of the energy released, and this energy is measured by a seismograph. It is a highly sensitive device that is calibrated so that the amount of displacement by the compass within the device indicates the amount of energy radiated and carried by seismography, and since the values ​​with which the earthquake intensity is known are very large, it starts with ‘ a small disturbance that can be picked up and detected by the device and may not be detected by the device.The human sense leads to violent unrest that shakes the earth and cracks buildings. As for the second scale, it is the Mercalli scale, and this scale does not measure the earthquake itself, but rather measures its impact on people and the extent of its devastating impact on its life and facilities. The world, and perhaps its only drawback. is that it does not reflect information about the extent of the destruction that took place, because it can occur on a large scale (for example) in an uninhabited area, so its destruction is less than a small scale (for example 4), but it took place in an area with a large population, urban or industrial density.

Quoted from “Riyadh”

All published articles represent only the opinion of its authors.

Leave a Comment