Ever since late sixties, the issues related to the preservation of natural environment started to play an increasingly prominent role within the framework of international relations. In its turn, this eventually led to the signing of Kyoto Protocol in 1997, the provisions of which assign country-signatories with the specified annual quotas for the emission of CO2 into Earth’s atmosphere. Nevertheless, as time goes on, more and more people get to realize the sheer ineffectiveness of internationally enacted global policies, aimed to protect the natural environment. Partially, this can be explained by the fact that many of these policies appear to be based upon conceptually fallacious theoretical premises. The foremost of these premises is the assumption that the concepts of environmental protection and technological progress are incompatible. Such an assumption, however, cannot possibly represent an undeniable truth-value. In fact, it is specifically technological progress, which makes the effective preservation of Earth’s natural environment possible, in the first place. In this paper, I will aim to explore the soundness of an earlier suggestion at length. As it was mentioned earlier, it was namely during the course of late sixties and earlier seventies that the environmental movement started to become increasingly popular with more and more people in Western countries. The phenomenon of ‘green movement’, however, cannot be thought of in terms of ‘thing in itself’ – this movement’s emergence was one among many emanations of Western left-wing social activism. According to Torgerson: “The environmentalism that came onto the public scene in the late 1960s and early 1970s was part of an outburst of activism in civil society that was followed by the emergence of a range of new social movements” (715). What it means is that, from the very beginning, European ‘green movement’ was driven by essentially ideological considerations, on the part of its advocates, rather than by environmental activists’ genuine concern about the deterioration of environmental situation in Europe. After all, European ‘green movement’ did not originate during the course of pre-industrial era, when there were a number of objective preconditions for the people to be concerned with environmental pollution, as something that was directly affecting the quality of their lives. For example, by the end of 18 th century, there were virtually no forests left in Europe (the trees were cut down to build ships and to be used as firewood). Before the beginning of Industrial Revolution, Europe’s largest cities were nothing but smelly cloakas – the absence of sewers, was causing these cities’ residents to dump their biological waste onto the streets and into the rivers. It is namely the onset of Industrial Revolution, which allowed the restoration of European societies’ environmental integrity. Therefore, it does not come as a particular surprise that environmentalist movement appears essentially ‘artificial’. This also explains the conceptual inconsistency of ‘green movement’ activists’ claim that technological progress, in general, and the process of technology-driven industrialization, in particular, are th