Global warming?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Does anyone really believe, or is there any hard science, that spewing millions of metric tons of GHG from fossil fuels (primarily automobiles and power plants) into the atmosphere every year is healthy for the environment...or even neutral in its impact?

Get China and India on board then give us a call.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Get China and India on board then give us a call.

I am of the opinion that the US should demonstrate that it is a world leader in much the same manner as it did with the environmental movement of the 1970s.

Or we can be petulant and cast blame and point fingers with a "you first" attitude and pretend our hands are clean despite the fact that we are responsible for more than 20% of worldwide GHG emissions.

In any case, why would I want to call you?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

I am of the opinion that the US should demonstrate that it is a world leader in much the same manner as it did with the environmental movement of the 1970s.

Or we can be petulant and cast blame and point fingers with a "you first" attitude and pretend our hands are clean despite the fact that we are responsible for more than 20% of worldwide GHG emissions.

In which case we would play right into the hands of those who wish us to spend billions of our GDP while they do nothing. China is second only to the US and will surpass it in the next few years. They emit 16% of GHG. They would love nothing more than to have us spend ourselves into the third world while they have no such restrictions. Add India to the mix and the two of them emit more than the US. They are among the most rapidly growing economies in the world.

http://www.unep.org/cpi/briefs/2008M...tersFactBOXWhy

The pollution leader was China, followed by the United States, which past data show is the leader in emissions per person in carbon dioxide output. And although several developed countries slightly reduced output in 2007, the U.S. churned out more.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep...n/na-warming26

China’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Highlight The Need for New Technologies And An International Commitment to Reduce Emissions
China is building new coal-based electric generation at an astounding pace. The rapid growth in the use of coal in that country highlights the importance of developing and deploying “climate-friendly” technologies, including advanced coal technologies, which can be exported to developing countries. In addition, China’s aggressive use of coal demonstrates why it is so critical that all major emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) commit to reducing emissions in order to reduce overall global GHG emissions.
•
In 2007, China built one new coal-based electric generating unit about every two and half days on average, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
•
In 2007, China built just over 100 gigawatts (GW) of new power generating capacity. While it took 110 years (from 1882-1993) for the total power generating capacity in the United States to reach a little over 800 GW, China will have reached the same number in 7 to 8 years, if the country’s current growth pace continues.
•
The current demand for coal in China exceeds 2 billion tons per year, which is twice the current demand for coal in the United States.
•
IEA predicts that global energy-related CO2 emissions will increase 57 percent between 2005 and 2030, with developing countries accounting for more than 75 percent of this projected increase.
•
Between 2005 and 2030, China and India alone are expected to account for 56 percent of the worldwide increase in CO2 emissions.
•
China’s GHG emissions have risen 80 percent since 1990, and emissions are projected to rise another 65 percent by 2020.

http://www.eei.org/ourissues/TheEnvi...mateChange.pdf

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

In which case we would play right into the hands of those who wish us to spend billions of our GDP while they do nothing.

Dejas vu all over again.

The same alarmist rhetoric we heard in the 70s with the passage of Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, Hazardous Materials Disposal Act...

"Economic doomsday!" screamed the affected industries at every opportunity.

Didnt happen...in fact, many of those laws and environmental initiatives stimulated innovation.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

In which case we would play right into the hands of those who wish us to spend billions of our GDP while they do nothing. China is second only to the US and will surpass it in the next few years. They emit 16% of GHG. They would love nothing more than to have us spend ourselves into the third world while they have no such restrictions. Add India to the mix and the two of them emit more than the US. They are among the most rapidly growing economies in the world.

http://www.unep.org/cpi/briefs/2008M...tersFactBOXWhy



http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep...n/na-warming26



http://www.eei.org/ourissues/TheEnvi...mateChange.pdf

That's ridiculous. If we invent/build the technology to help curb the effects, then we can sell it to the rest of the world. I don't care what you may think, I KNOW we can get ourselves off of damaging technology like coal and oil and move to completely clean and green technology to generate all the power we need, both for cars and for buildings.

[tw]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

If we invent/build the technology to help curb the effects, then we can sell it to the rest of the world.

One of the most green innovations in recent history is the oxygen sensor. Developed by Bosch. Every car in the world now requires one - with the Germans reaping profits everywhere in the world from their innovation.

When the Germans decided to get serious about air pollution, well, as a result, most American coal plants are dependent in some way to innovations reaping more profits for Germans.

Countries that choose to solve problems by innovating routinely become world leaders and economically wealthy.

Solutions to ozone depletion reaped tremendous profits for Dow Chemical(?) who simply developed new material to replace ozone depleting CFCs.

The nations who find solutions to global warming will clearly reap wealth as a result. History has demonstrated that repeatedly.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

That's ridiculous. If we invent/build the technology to help curb the effects, then we can sell it to the rest of the world. I don't care what you may think, I KNOW we can get ourselves off of damaging technology like coal and oil and move to completely clean and green technology to generate all the power we need, both for cars and for buildings.

Nah, we will just laugh at their stupidity, assuming they don't change, in twenty years when our innovations bring in money and then they get regulations put on them.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

That's ridiculous. If we invent/build the technology to help curb the effects, then we can sell it to the rest of the world. I don't care what you may think, I KNOW we can get ourselves off of damaging technology like coal and oil and move to completely clean and green technology to generate all the power we need, both for cars and for buildings.

Pure fantasy. The powerful lobbyist of this country and group we have in Congress have ruined the political process. Nothing like that will ever happen in your lifetime.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Pure fantasy. The powerful lobbyist of this country and group we have in Congress have ruined the political process. Nothing like that will ever happen in your lifetime.

First, its the US shouldnt act on GHG emissions until China does first....strike one.

Then, your econ 101 theory-the resulting innovation would be an economic deterrent.....strike two

Now, the lobbyist have ruined the political process, somehow preventing any action on GHG emissions - you forget that friends of big oil are no longer in the WH or the majority of Congress.....STRIKE THREE!!!!!

Relegating you back to the minors of politics until you are better prepared to play with the big boys and big girls.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

First, its the US shouldnt act on GHG emissions until China does first....strike one.

Then, your econ 101 theory-the resulting innovation would be an economic deterrent.....strike two

Now, the lobbyist have ruined the political process, somehow preventing any action on GHG emissions - you forget that friends of big oil are no longer in the WH or the majority of Congress.....STRIKE THREE!!!!!

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Pure fantasy. The powerful lobbyist of this country and group we have in Congress have ruined the political process. Nothing like that will ever happen in your lifetime.

Well, if it doesn't happen in my lifetime, then mankind will certainly be doomed, because I believe we will reach a "tilting point" of no return sometime in the next 20 years. In fact, we may have already reached/passed it. I do think we still have time to turn it around, but if we continue to ignore the problem, and we continue with all the burning of fossil fuels at the same rate we are now (and which will certainly get worse if we do nothing to stop it), then I think the tilting point will pass and humans (and other animals) will be up a creek without a paddle.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Get China and India on board then give us a call.

Great. Let's go ahead and destroy ourselves because someone else doesn't care? That is just stupid. That's like saying, you'll quit smoking when everyone else quits, even though you know it might kill you or make your life miserable in some other way.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

Great. Let's go ahead and destroy ourselves because someone else doesn't care? That is just stupid. That's like saying, you'll quit smoking when everyone else quits, even though you know it might kill you or make your life miserable in some other way.

So everything will be lovely if we don't pee in our corner of the same pool?