> Is it not obvious that 'environmental protection' costs money and may prevent some company from making more money? I cannot tell from your tone and the jab a

> Is it not obvious that 'environmental protection' costs money and may prevent some company from making more money? I cannot tell from your tone and the jab at “technical geniuses” if you’re saying this is a bad thing. Yes, environmental protection costs money. This money should be paid by the companies who are directly or potentially placing the environment at risk. This burden should not be externalized onto the public so private entities can make more money.