The destruction of our natural resources and contamination of our food supply continue to occur, largely because of the extreme difficulty in attaching legal responsibility to those who continue to treat our environment with careless abandon(放任). Attempts to prevent pollution by legislation, economic encouragement and friendly persuasion have been met by lawsuits, personal and industrial denial and long delays--not only in accepting responsibility, but more importantly, in doing something about it.

It seems that only when government decides it can afford tax encouragement or production sacrifices is there any initiative for change. Where is industry’s and our recognition that protecting mankind’s great treasure is the single most important responsibility? If ever there will be time for environmental health professionals to come to the frontlines and provide leadership to solve environmental problems, that time is now.

We are being asked, and, in fact, the public is demanding that we take positive action. It is our responsibility as professionals in environmental health to make the difference. Yes, the ecologists, the environmental activists and the conservationists serve to communicate, stimulate thinking and promote behavioral change. However, it is those of us who are paid to make the decisions to develop, improve and enforce environmental standards, I submit, who must lead the charge.

We must recognize that environmental health issues do not stop at city limits, county lines, state or even federal boundaries. We can no longer afford to be tunnel-visioned in our approach. We must visualize issues from every perspective to make the objective decisions. We must express our views clearly to prevent media distortion and public confusion.

I believe we have a three-part mission for the present. First, we must continue to press for improvements in the quality of life that people can make for themselves. Second, we must investigate and understand the link between environment and health. Third, we must be able to communicate technical information in a form that citizens can understand. If we can accomplish these three goals in this decade, maybe we can finally stop environmental degradation, and not merely hold it back. We will then be able to spend pollution dollars truly on prevention rather than on bandages.

An air-conditioner has become a sign of middle-class status in developing nations. But as air-conditioners appear from windows and storefronts across the world, scientists are becoming increasingly alarmed about the impact of the gases on which they run.

The oldest CFC coolants used in air-conditioners, which are highly damaging to the ozone layer, have been largely rejected from use; and the newest ones, used widely in industrialized nations, have little or no effect on the ozone layer. But these newest gases have an another impact — they contribute to global warming thousands of times more than CO2 does, the standard greenhouse gas. Indeed, the leading scientists in the field have just calculated that if all the equipment entering the world market uses the newest gases currently employed in air-conditioners, up to 27 percent of all global warning will result from those gases by 2050.

So the treatment to cure one global environmental disaster is now seeding another. "There is precious little time to do something, to act," said Stephen O. Andersen, the co-chairman of an international organization's technical and economic advisory panel.

Promising technologies wait, blocked in the wings. In China and a few other countries, room air-conditioners using hydrocarbons — which cause little warming or ozone damage — are already coming off assembly lines in small numbers but have not yet been approved for sale, in part because the chemicals are flammable (易燃的).Yet in Europe, refrigerators that cool with hydrocarbons have been in use for years, and some companies in the United States, such as Pepsi and Ben and Jerry's, have recently changed in-store coolers from HFCs to hydrocarbons as part of sustainability plans. But the patent is being argued. And some governments have still not finished safety testing.

Mr. Wypior, whose agency is trying to promote climate-friendly air-conditioning industries in India and China, said: “The technologies are available. They're well known. They're proven— though not at scale. So why aren't we moving?”

Have you ever heard of the Coral Sea? It is home to an amazing variety of turtles, sharks, whales, dolphins, large fish, birds, corals, plants, and many other species. Many of these species are endangered elsewhere in the world, but still survive in the healthy environment of the Coral Sea.

The Coral Sea is a large series of coral reefs located off the northeast coast of Australia. This area is three times larger than Australia’s famous Great Barrier Reef, which the Coral Sea borders.

The Coral Sea is one of the few coral reef environments that have remained largely undamaged by over-fishing, oil and gas exploration and pollution. However, statistics show that coral reefs around the world are disappearing five times faster than rainforests. It is very likely that in the near future the Coral Sea will face the same threats to its existence.

The Australian government is currently looking at options for protecting the Coral Sea but has made no decisions. Environmentalists are pushing for laws to declare the Coral Sea area a marine protected area, which will mean a large “no-take zone” for fishermen, a no-exploration zone for gas and oil companies and a no-dump zone for pollution, possibly making the Coral Sea a marine park larger than any other in the world.

We can write letters to Australian leaders, Australian environmental protection agencies, and Australian friends, to let them know that people worldwide support this protection of the Coral Sea. To lose this last great marine wilderness world would be a loss for the whole world.