Is it necessary to protect the environment at ANY COST?? Why???

Everything on this planet works like it does because one thing depends on another thing for all things to survive. it is similar to the food chain, to keep one species from becoming too overcrowded there has to be another species around bigger and stronger to eat it so things don't get out of hand. trees create oxygen so we can breathe, in turn they take in carbon dioxide for them to breathe. everything is here for a reason. not 1 single thing in this world does not serve a purpose. i just gave a few examples but if you check it out you will see just exactly why each and everything is on this planet.

There has to be a balance. Obviously the environment is constantly changing. For instance, landscapes have been destroyed and reshaped by many different events long before humans walked on this planet. However, today, so often we carelessly destroy what is around us without giving any consideration to how important what was in an area might have been. Obviously, we need to use different natural recourses to sustain our way of life. For instance trees are used in so many different ways and obviously we will be continuing to use them for years to come. However, assuming one is going to cut in an ancient forest, do we really need to cut down an entire ancient forest? Or could we just cut the sick and dieing trees in that ancient forest? Then replant seeds of the same type of tree(s) we cut. Granted that is a very very simplistic example. I really believe there can be a balance between keeping/making our environment healthy and business economics. Even without raising consumer prices. However big businesses will have to let go of some of their power and control, plus settle for only making several billion dollars in profits rather than several hundred billion.

If the environment goes, what exactly are humans going to live off?

No. Once NASA perfects space travel there will be plenty of other planets and galaxies we can rape and pillage as well.

"At any cost" would necessarily mean an change in the lifestyle of most people, for the worse. If you could get everyone to agree to this it might be feasible but there are limitations. This is like demanding that you be protected from all hazard and risk. It is impossible to totally fulfill. You always run into he cost-benefit analysis principle in which smaller costs yield greater benefits in the beginning but as things improve, smaller and smaller improvements have higher and higher costs until the decision is made as to what is enough. Take as an example learning a skill sport in which the quality of equipment is important. In the beginning, a modest financial outlay and practice yields substantial improvements. As you improve, you have the need for better and better equipment, which costs more and more and yields smaller and smaller improvements as the results. What will be your final acceptable level of expenses and results? If this is applied to the environment, substantial changes may be made with little cost and lots of cooperation but at some point you can no longer afford the increased costs and obtaining cooperation becomes increasingly difficult. Among many ways you can sort out people, it seems to me that there are absolute and probabilities people. Absolute people will only accept perfection and probabilities people will accept whatever can be realistically done with the available funds and resources.

No, the reason that we need to protect the environment is because we live in it and are thus dependent upon it working acceptably. If it weren't for us none of it would matter anyway so for protecting the environment to be of any importance we have to stay around thus making any ideas to protect the environment that involve human extinction too high a cost. Mass murder also isn't an acceptable cost no matter what and neither is forcing the third world to live in perpetual poverty as some people have proposed.

(Sigh) Too bad man is the cause of everything that is happening. Man tends to destroy almost everything by improving on something. Man is the one who reaps off the environment. We (human race) should at least make this world presentable to the next generation by keeping it at least if not beautiful, maybe a livable earth for them. The earth looks like a huge trash can now(well except for some FEW places, majority are causing our eyes to sore).

Then what ???????????????????????? See we the man creates problem. We are responsible for the pollution. If this problem continues, then surely in future no traces of life will be found...........................!!

No the earth is going to do what it's going to do. no matter what you and i do. if i were you i would invest in all this green nonsense you well get rich.