Sooner or later the islands, the largest first and then the rest will become something akin to a shopping center parking lots, ie pavement, stripes on the ground, tunnels, more asphalt and a corner of a flower that count as protected natural areas. Without remedy, because even those who govern these places still think, as I once heard him say to a professor at ULL Alberto Brito, that sustainable development is to sustain the level of development (Or development), or what is, not to reduce budgets in buildings, roads, civil works, ports, airport runways, etc..
few weeks ago, Diario de Avisos published a German auditing firm stated that "there is a tunnel feasibility of building a Guimar valleys and La Orotava. Crazy. We are aware that infrastructure 'ideal' facilitate connections, ease the highways, and regulate so many roads, but at what cost? Pierce did half island? What we do is beyond the understanding of planners and politicians is that we live in a small, unique characteristics for its geology, morphology and environmental value and that every day, with such actions, it is a notch that hurts these peculiarities. The mayor of La Orotava says, against all odds, that the development of society goes through there, asphalt, tightening up and build, otherwise the island's economy will eventually succumb. There are, however, many opinions to the contrary. Including the one which says that tourism, the main source of income for the Canaries, does not move to an island many miles from the metropolis to arrive in five minutes from Puerto de la Cruz to Guimaras.
The only solution is regulation, and not for growth 'unsustainable'. It is feasible that there are so many cars, so many roads, runways, roads, parking lots, highways, rings island ... in the islands. The more infrastructure will build more cars, more pollution, less space, and will require more roads, more tunnels. It is a snake biting its tail (or tail as they say here). Late means that the islands are not continuous and territories because it supports limited development. Where and when our leaders placed the limit? We assume that if you start watching the car park or the mall.
few weeks ago, Diario de Avisos published a German auditing firm stated that "there is a tunnel feasibility of building a Guimar valleys and La Orotava. Crazy. We are aware that infrastructure 'ideal' facilitate connections, ease the highways, and regulate so many roads, but at what cost? Pierce did half island? What we do is beyond the understanding of planners and politicians is that we live in a small, unique characteristics for its geology, morphology and environmental value and that every day, with such actions, it is a notch that hurts these peculiarities. The mayor of La Orotava says, against all odds, that the development of society goes through there, asphalt, tightening up and build, otherwise the island's economy will eventually succumb. There are, however, many opinions to the contrary. Including the one which says that tourism, the main source of income for the Canaries, does not move to an island many miles from the metropolis to arrive in five minutes from Puerto de la Cruz to Guimaras.
The only solution is regulation, and not for growth 'unsustainable'. It is feasible that there are so many cars, so many roads, runways, roads, parking lots, highways, rings island ... in the islands. The more infrastructure will build more cars, more pollution, less space, and will require more roads, more tunnels. It is a snake biting its tail (or tail as they say here). Late means that the islands are not continuous and territories because it supports limited development. Where and when our leaders placed the limit? We assume that if you start watching the car park or the mall.
0 comments:
Post a Comment