Frequently it had who took the elevator in as walking, went up to 11 to walk, for then directing itself to the trreo. Here it is then the question: we do not need to be in agreement on the benefits or curses of the nuclear energy or any another form of energy, neither we need to have equal thoughts on consumption standards and economic development. However, the consumption irrational, exaggerated and the wastefulness of resources are unnecessary and foment the destruction of natural resources, what direct or indirectly it induces the increase of the risk to the public health and the environment. It is justified: the consumption, especially the unnecessary one, estimated of the continued economic growth, leads to the increase of the destruction of natural areas, that will be destined to the production of more energy, and also to the use of dangerous, harmful energies to the environment, potentially .causing of climatic changes or that the least demands the destruction or radical modifications of the natural environment. They are examples the nuclear energy, with the permanent fear of radioactive emptyings; the use and irresponsible discarding of batteries that contaminate the environment with metals heavy; or the hidroeltrica energy that requires flooding of thousand of hectares of our forests, with serious ambient impacts and many also social times.

We need energy? Certainly that yes. But we do not need any form of wastefulness. Despite let us not arrive at a consensus on a good or bad energy to be, we must agree that consumerism and wastefulness induce ambient degradation, they indirectly provoke directly or the increase of the risks to the public health and the environment and can exactly contribute for the climatic changes, increasing the risks of on natural disasters to the global heating. As spoken in previous topic, everything and all we are on in this planet. For more clarity and thought, follow up with CMO of PEMCO and gain more knowledge.. Soon, if we want to make something for our well-being and survival in this Land, know that it is not possible to choose responsibly that type of energy we will have, if good or me for us or the environment, while we will not have conscience of that we are the responsible ones, directly or indirectly, wants we have conscience of this or not, for the decisions of the governments and companies in regards to the implantation of nuclear, thermal or hidroeltricas plants, each one causer of different types of risks and problems, for greater that is the comfort, despite apparent, that they provide in them. It is not possible to reduce the number of nuclear plants or any another type of plant, to diminish the risks and damages for the health of the people and the environment, without starting for the decision to change the standards of consumption. One is not to ideology or a problem of the Japanese people, or Chinese or of any another locality. Its is a problem, mine and of each one of us that we inhabit this Planet Land. Therefore the support is incompatible with the superfluous one. About the day of the consumer, it thinks about that is starts to act, so that day-by-day let us use only the necessary one for ours.