This is what Minister of Environmental Protection Amir Peretz said at the Pratt Award ceremony for media on environmental issues on behalf of the Hashel Center
Yesterday (Thursday) morning, the Pratt Award ceremony for media on environmental issues was held in Neve Schechter in Tel Aviv. The audience was made up of media people, environmentalists and there was a feeling of a powerful and united community. The awards ceremony was moderated by Ricky Blich.
The incoming Minister of Environmental Protection, Amir Peretz, spoke at the event and emphasized that he will not allow a budgetary compromise on environmental issues, due to the finance cuts. He also emphasized that "there is a close connection between environmental justice and social justice and that the quality of the environment is a very important economic parameter".
In his words, Minister Peretz referred to the complete cancellation of the greenhouse gas project's budget of NIS 80 million per year: "They lowered it to zero with a very debunked claim - because we found gas and the country is going to be clean anyway. A claim that is hard to hear. I can understand budgetary claims. This violates an obligation of the State of Israel. We need you, this is not a simple discussion, we are at a disadvantage. Environmental quality is a very important economic parameter."
Other issues that the minister referred to, among others, were the need to reduce the scope of gas exports in order to leave as much gas as possible for future generations, and one of the participants from the audience turned to him and demanded that no gas exports be allowed at all. The minister reprimanded the construction companies that allegedly boast of green construction and even charge money for it, and in the same context, also expressed concern that as part of the procedures to lower housing prices, the government might freeze the green construction standards, allegedly because they make the apartment more expensive.
Regarding the delay in the recycling project, Minister Peretz said: "The most frustrating thing is when you come to certain cities where a large part of the residents are in the process of separation at the source, there is no recycling facility at the end. Today we are close to 20 recycling projects, and it is highly doubtful that we will not have the proper budgets to encourage, I am not sure if such projects will actually be carried out soon."
He also said that he will demand NIS 70 million from the treasury to prepare an infrastructure for transferring the ammonia from the tank, which endangers the residents of Haifa Bay.
He finished his words "every day I feel more and more committed to environmental issues".
Below is a breakdown of the winners in the following categories:
• Large-scale communication: Erez Erlichman YNET
The judges' reasoning: Erez has been giving expression to the animal world in extensive environmental contexts for years
Erez is indeed a very impressive journalist: both in terms of the large scope of his work and due to the fact that he does everything by himself: investigation, editing, photography, directing. In this way he reflects the spirit of what is happening today in the journalistic world.
The judging committee found Erez's writing to be heartwarming and was very impressed by the fact that he touches on issues that few deal with, as well as by the fact that he manages to maintain this niche in a noteworthy way for a long time.
A dedicated and consistent journalist with a refreshing, renewed and funny presentation style.
• Honorable Mention: Sharon Yodsin Jerusalem Post
The judges' reasoning: Sharon deals with a variety of topics, her writing is very good and rich. She manages to publish news and articles on a wide scale, which inspires others. In an era where many journalists are mainly busy with office work and excel at "copying" and "pasting", Sharon belongs to the old school of journalists who do serious field work. She manages to do in the Jerusalem Post what no one before her has been able to do.
• Article prize: Liat Schlesinger Maariv
The judges' reasoning: Liat managed to create a fascinating investigation of 7 pages on a topic that has been talked about for years and despite all this she managed to create a comprehensive document that renews and promotes the topic.
Beyond the fact that Liat managed to breathe life into and bring new angles to an apparently worn-out topic, her article is characterized by the fact that she does not adopt the tone of a preacher calling on the public to change its ways and she did not even resort to a policy of intimidation.
The investigation excels in many detailed responses and points of view and is fascinating and of first-class importance.
• Independent Communication Award: Asaf Chertkoff, Ether in the hands
The judges' reasoning: The "Bydim" website specializes in writing at a high level, but at the same time friendly. "Hands on" is groundbreaking and original, although it is intended for the advanced but does not tire the novices either.
The easy-to-use interface and design offer a site that is friendly not only to the environment but also to the user.
• Honorable mention: Dror Reshef Echo - Wiki
An excellent site that provides an infrastructure of knowledge and information in an in-depth and comprehensive manner.
Brilliant and innovative - no more of the "same thing"
This is a real start-up that creates an infrastructure of professional environmental content for anyone interested
10 תגובות
Skeptic, it's because the Israeli establishment is not willing to spend a single shekel on anything, and it doesn't matter what benefit will come from it. Especially the employees of the future tycoons who sit in the Treasury do not want to impose on them what they consider an unnecessary expense. Otherwise how will you get hired by them?
Benjamin May
The political establishment in Israel has (actually) not adopted any position to invest a lot of money to reduce CO2 emissions.
The statements of Shimon Peres in Copenhagen in 2009 are his personal statements. Amir Peretz's opinion is his personal opinion which is contrary to the opinion of the political establishment. Minister Erdan's letter of intent in 2010 (intended to add content to Shimon Peres' statements in Copenhagen) was not a serious letter either. Let's recall that Minister Erdan was at the time Minister of the Environment and his letter was intended to justify his tenure as Minister of the Environment. In the three years that have passed since Erdan's letter -- the content of his letter has been communicated in terms of execution that the establishment in Israel is not ready to spend a lot of money to prevent CO2 emissions (statements, letters and speeches do not cost money, so if they continue).
Liron:
When the political establishment adopts and stands behind a controversial scientific position (some are not
There are few who claim that there is no warming or that man has no effect on it at all), it certainly is
A reason for writing a scientific newspaper, just like adopting the position of the scientists who supported the research
About the nuclear bomb and the development of the bomb is a landmark in a scientific matter and not just a military one.
In fact, because of the economic aspects of many of the studies that shaped our world
(landing on the moon for example), politics is involved quite a bit in science and vice versa, therefore
The separation is problematic in this case.
My father - we will not do anything about it - I saw an overview of the situation of PADH emissions from different countries.
Most of the developed world reduced emissions mostly for unrelated reasons and China and Russia (and I think India too) increased enough for everyone plus Rabit.
Want to stop the Fed? Go talk to them and convince them to stop their FDF.
Most of the "solutions" offered by the greens either do not work, or are not effective for the money invested in them - and in some cases actually destroy.
Burning trees for electricity - something that really happens - precisely because of green movements divorced from science - is not something positive for the FADH. Burning corn-based fuel is almost as bad.
Taxes on PADH will simply move polluting factories to places where there are fewer restrictions.
PADF credits do this to pollute factories because then they can avoid polluting and get money for it (there is a factory in China that does exactly that).
Electric cars don't save pollution - they just move it out of the city (which would be good if they were more technically and economically feasible).
Solar power plants require a lot of space and the commitments for many years for an unreliable source of energy for those who live outside the desert. Wind farms are even less reliable. require oil and backup themselves and also cause environmental damage such as killing birds (and noise, and "fluttering" - for some reason dams, which are much more active than wind plants - do not have the solution to the ecological damage they cause, unlike wind plants.
- Did I forget something?
It was said here (allegedly quoting the words of Amir Peretz):
"I will not give a hand to the cancellation of the allocation for reducing greenhouse gases in the amount of NIS 80 million, this is a violation of an international obligation"
So it should be noted: there is no *international* commitment of Israel to participate in reducing greenhouse gases, nor have we been required to make such an international commitment. Amir Peretz's claim regarding Israel's international commitment is a *misleading and demagogic* claim. Please read the following article from the Ha'aretz newspaper from the last few days, especially read the third paragraph (the paragraph before the photo of the three chimneys at the power generation facility).
The article in Haaretz newspaper
http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/science/.premium-1.2014510
The Ha'aretz newspaper stated that a commitment is a commitment of some kind by President Peres, but that Peres is not a binding envoy of the State of Israel. Often when Shimon Peres speaks in different places in the world, he only expresses his personal opinion or his personal interpretation.
The exact state of affairs, as I understand it, is: Israel has a multi-year plan of NIS 2.2 billion to reduce greenhouse gases and reduce air pollution in Israel (two goals in one plan). This is not an *international commitment* but a *only national* plan that is integrated into the country's economic plans. This program started in 2010 before the discovery of the huge gas reserves in Israel's maritime territory.
The meaning of the discovery of these gas reserves is that Israel will reduce greenhouse gas emissions regardless of the allocation of funds for the NIS 2.2 billion program. It is expected that in the near future Israel will produce almost all of its electricity using only natural gas. It is electricity generation using gas that lowers greenhouse gas emissions (and other pollutants as well). As mentioned - switching to electricity production using natural gas is not conditional on the implementation of the NIS 2.2 billion plan. From all of this it appears that there is no urgency in spending 80 million shekels today, when Israel is in a budgetary crisis (a deficit of 50 billion shekels created in the last year). It is better that the eighty million shekels that became unnecessary (due to the discovery of natural gas) be directed to more important purposes (such as food or health for the poor). The cut of NIS 80 million is the cut that Minister Amir Peretz resents.
Minister Peretz claims that the rationale for cutting NIS 80 million in the budget to lower the federal tax rate is a *disprovable* rationale. I brought up the Ministry of Finance's reasoning for cutting the budget (the discovery of natural gas and the budget crisis). It seems to me that Minister Peretz is the real denier in the story since the reasoning for cutting the aforementioned budget is a justified one.
I am not expressing a positive or negative opinion here regarding the importance (or unimportance) of greenhouse gas emissions or air pollution emissions. I expressed my opinion only about the populism in the words of Amir Peretz.
God forbid, I'm not against anything, and I didn't mean to offend, I just expressed my opinion. It's your full right to post whatever you want.
I enjoy coming in here every time and wait and enjoy your articles.
In your opinion it is unnecessary. But we are already in the process of no return, and what we have done in the world is maybe one percent of what should have been done. So avoid that too?
Amir Peretz and his watermelon buddies see environmental quality as a crucible to dig their social agendas into.
The environmental damage of PADH emitted in Israel is - if we accept the claims of AWG - it is for the whole world together and not only for the residents of the country - since we are a small country, our effect is quite small.
Even if the country sinks under the sea tomorrow, the change it will make in the global emissions of GHG will be negligible.
It is only logical that a minister would not want a cut in his office - but his agenda is no less important than other things - and there are things more immediate and critical than the release of the FAD.
We've heard this nonsense every time we want to express our opinion, especially from those who disagree with it.
There are threats to science and if they don't write about them on a science website, then where? I haven't found that anyone else cares what happens to scientific development.
And as mentioned, even if I post one such news every six months, I receive complaints, all the more so if by chance there are two - the end of the world, out of 100 articles per month as mentioned.
Lately there are too many political articles that are not directly related to science.
It mostly demeans the site. If I want to read politics related to science there are many other sites.