It is all talk. The Bahamas included. We're arent any more serious.
We dont care for all the deforestation, increase use of paper for shopping bags, do nothing to regulate emissions here and worst, we pushing forward with LNG which traps more heat than CO2.

LNG's main ingredient is methane.
Methane leaves the atmosphere quicker but while its there it traps more heat. We signed an agreement with Shell and LNG for NP, more LNG for the port power and want more LNG pumping cruise ships to come to our shore, thinking it will reduce global warming.

We have no concern for reefs, as we approve reef damaing developments, dont regulate reef safe incredients, dont care for how many golf courses litter our islands etc.

this is why i say there is no real plan. The govt has gone all in on cruises ships coming to downtown and are surprised that the area caters to the cruise ships while they are downtownt. if you want the area to more of a neighbourhood, it needs to have the things in place for it to happen.

They have yet to realize that you get what you wish for. With no plan you go where the wind blows. There has been 0 major moves towards changing the status quo. Knocking down buildings wont spur development, unless you had a developer who was too broke to knock down the building first.

Yes, it does get rid of eyesores and reduced demo costs however, without presenting a vision, you are hoping some billionaire comes in and offers to do the work for you. BUt even Kerzner and Sarkis thought up thier resorts, no building being there dissuaded them. The properties that needed to go went afterwards.

> “We hope, long term, we can get some residents here. We can get some mixed use structures here. We can maybe have a hotel but there are thoughts as to what we can do in terms of the creation of rooftop spaces. We hope that every time we do one of these demolition it sparks interest and appetite from the Bahamian people.”

and this here is the problem. They are hoping and wishing. If a developer wanted to build there they would not be detered by an old building.

1) the Central govt needs to think about proper local govt. There is a committee or whatever with no real powres. Even less than the actual legal local govts out there.

2) if they want to be involved they need to put thier vision out there. develop a master plan, zone accordingly and put the infrastructure in place.
How are you going to manage traffic, waste, transit, zoning etc. What do you see where, What is designated as park space, residential, commercial retail, school, etc.

Right now we have a hodge podge of ideas and no real plan. If you have a toursim led ministry/corp why would they have incentive for residences? There is no proper plan in place and its clear.

Yall went to the govt should have expected it to be honest.

We have people buildings not to code, a govt not enforcing code, others next door still not to code and potters cay not to code. No insurance, no fire supression, no requirement for fire suppression and here comes Travis and Sebas now talking about codes.

We are in a big mess.

> Mr Wilson condemned the looting but said police are unlikely to pursue those who took supplies. “It might be illegal, but at the same time they're lightening the weight on the boat,” he said.

sometimes i forget if the this is satire or not

You have a failed education system when you need such things.

> While the Ministry of Tourism, in partnership with private sector resorts and marinas, had done its best to promote The Bahamas at the Fort Lauderdale Boat Show,

The Tribune has seemingly turned into a mix of opinions writing.
These statements are left in as fact and never justified.
How can the author say definitively without ever explaining how they 'done its best'. Is he sure that they did thier best? Could they not have done more? What is it they did?

A simple statement can be "while the MOT. ......has been actively promoting The Bahamas...."

> The Bahamas, as one of the most exposed and vulnerable nations to climate change effects, has always been keen to do its part - and set an example - in combating global warming.

I'm sorry but is the author writing an opinion piece?

What is it showing to back this up?

According to URCA 99% of power production is fossil.
Most govt buildings are not LEED certified.
We dont mandate anything regarding building insulation or anything to reduce the energy consumed to cool buildings.
LNG which is touted as this major fix....contains mostly methane.
Per the Asia Natural Gas and Energy Association a proponent and Lobby for LNG
> While methane has a shorter atmospheric lifespan than carbon dioxide, it traps more heat per molecule because of its structure.

So LNG which dissipates faster than CO2, traps more heat while it is in the atmosphere than CO2.

Tell me how is the Bahamas keen to do it part? Has the Tribune drunk the koolaid too?

The question then mathematically is the marginal cost worth an entire stop being removed?
Then from a govt standpoint I dont think cruisel ines will risk such a move

Remember also, Royal is pumping millions into the PI project, not stopping at Nassau will then kill that investment.

In exchange for the right to print money and this exclusivity, what is the treasury going to receive in return?