<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Climate Change · Pablo Stafforini</title><link>https://stafforini.com/tags/climate-change/</link><description/><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://stafforini.com/tags/climate-change/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>climate change</title><link>https://stafforini.com/quotes/ng-climate-change/</link><pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stafforini.com/quotes/ng-climate-change/</guid><description>&lt;![CDATA[<blockquote><p>[T]he real per capita income of the world now is about 7-8 times that of a century ago. If we proceed along an environmentally responsible path of growth, our great grandchildren in a century will have a real per capita income 5-6 times higher than our level now. Is it worth the risk of environmental disaster to disregard environmental protection now to try to grow a little faster? If this faster growth could be sustained, our great grandchildren would enjoy a real per capita income 7-8 times (instead of 5-6 times) higher than our level now. However, they may live in an environmentally horrible world or may well not have a chance to be born at all! The correct choice is obvious.</p></blockquote>
]]></description></item></channel></rss>