Translation and expansion **************************************************
The first part is acceptable on current evidence.
With the massive increase in global development throughout developed regions of the world an infrastructure of night time illumination of rural areas has a occurred along roads. This is highly detrimental to all plant life in the vicinity.
Plants need a period of total darkness to maintain optimum health.
The next part is evident as an error. Dutch Elm disease did not spread in this way but another disease may. This to me I would take as a warning of something as virulent as Dutch Elm disease spread along road networks. This spread will be accelerated by the weakened state of plants near roads.
The next piece is a viable solution to lighting in parks in cities to use a green light-bulb to help health of plants in cities. The claim of CO2 metabolism is false and benefits would only be small. To me it ends the argument in the earlier text that is false.
The next brings in the idea that plants may have a consciousness and they might hate humans.

Translation and expansion.****************************

The first statement calls into question the validity of disposing of waste in the oceans and other water courses. It raises the issue of the role of fish in filtering toxins out of oceans. This can be seem in the accumulation of toxins in top predators.
The second statement is logic that the more fish filtering the seas the less strain on the system. Numbers have been vastly reduced due to worldwide over fishing so it raises this issue in statement three.
In statement four it raises the issue of CO2 pollution of the oceans and the problem for plankton as a result.
The last two statements call into question whether we can appreciate the position of some of the species alive in the oceans.

Translation and expansion.****************************

The first statement calls into question the full impact of such vast numbers of ocean going vessels. The direct impact of noises and injury and also the indirect impact of transfer of species globally.
The second statement highlights one issue of high oceanic traffic.
The third statement is pure speculation but raises the issue of the role whales perform in the oceans. The forth statement acknowledges how close humans have come to eradicating most whales.
Statement five raises the issue of soil contamination globally and the lack of records regarding what has been dumped over time at various locations. The figure is spurious and simply a guess.
If there is even 5% unknown it is stupid.