Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM Posts: 3128 Location: The Bat Cave
Source: VPN
Is it possible that these people are ACTUALLY as stupid as they sound? Seriously, when these companies start moving over seas, do they think they will voluntarily keep emissions down? Do they not realize that when our steel companies cut production, that China and others will be pleased to step in and fill the gap? I guess at least we will be able to eliminate some of those pesky high-paying jobs, and put some working folk in the unemployment lines. Then they can belly-ache about how Republicans don't care about the average blue collar American....
This just burns my ass. It is similar to what Obama says he will do if elected...
_________________ Carney Institute of Technology
Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?
Joined: Sun 09-19-2004 4:41PM Posts: 755 Location: The Buffalo Barn
Source: CivilE Building
So...what is your solution to global warming. Shall we not set an example for the world, just continue to be one of the major producers of carbon dioxide.
Just like the US was setting an example in the 70s when nuclear fuel reprocessing was made illegal? Yea, no one cared and no other country stopped because reprocessing is the smart thing to do. If the US wants to set an example, we have to do it in an economical way that actually makes sense like reducing greenhouse gases, not just moving them from here to China.
_________________ Don't do drugs because if you do drugs you'll go to prison, and drugs are really expensive in prison.
Joined: Fri 09-05-2003 10:24AM Posts: 3589 Location: Oklahoma! Where the wind comes sweeping down the p l a i n s !
Source: VPN
Im not convinced that Global Warming isn't a myth. Natural events take place throughout the world that do considerably more "damage" to the environment than anything we do. Take volcanoes for example. Mt. St. Helens blanketed the entire United States with a sheet of ash. In my opinion, there is a natural cycle of things, and the world heating up a bit (1deg F avg) isn't worrying me that much. I have heard that people once grew successful crops in Greenland many many years ago, it looks like that time may be coming back.
Just because the president has decided to acknowledge it, doesn't mean he is right.
On the flip side, if people want to eliminate that pesky smog that builds up around the LA area and other similar places, then they can take clean air action, because that is obviously a direct result of human presence, and it only affects that locally.
Am I against alternative energy, or cleaner solutions? No. Personally, I'd love to have an electric car, not because it is cleaner, but because it is cheaper. Electricity is significantly cheaper for me than petroleum at the moment. Some say that just moves the tailpipe to the power companies... I say it is easier to maintain a few hundred tailpipes rather than a few million.
_________________ Ever get that feeling of deja vu?
Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM Posts: 3128 Location: The Bat Cave
Source: VPN
dannyboyfx wrote:
So...what is your solution to global warming. Shall we not set an example for the world, just continue to be one of the major producers of carbon dioxide.
We SHOULD try to knock NOX, SOX, Particulates, etc down as low as possible, but driving companies over seas to places like China (see the thread about those wonderful products that are coming in from China...) is not a wise solution. Do you believe that ALL other countries have more strenuous environmental regulations than we do? Do you actually think (we will use an industry of interest to me...) we will cut down, by any real amount, the steel we use? Do you think companies will actually spend money to clean up their emissions when they don't have to? Do you think that steel will get cheaper when we don't have any domestic production?
Unless they are talking about a laughably low amount of money for these credits, this will kill many industries. (I should mention that some of my thoughts are coming out against Obama's 'greenhouse gas' policy, and his belief that running US businesses out of the country will eliminate the production from that business. When in reality, people will ALWAYS want things, and things are produced with energy, and right now, that energy comes from carbon.)
Since I am feeling argumentative, lets throw out some questions.
1) Where do Coal and Oil come from (this isn't refering to 'the ground', where does the carbon ACTUALLY come from)?
2) Where do plants get their carbon?
_________________ Carney Institute of Technology
Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?
All Europe is taking stricter and stricter action versus pollution and CO2 emission. Also if you don't believe in Global Warming (but I would start questioning myself what are you learning in UMR), the resources are LIMITED; I can't believe the level of waste here...
_________________ Se non le esce sangie dalla bregna vuol dire che era gia' sfondata -- rulezz--
Joined: Fri 01-24-2003 7:13PM Posts: 1652 Location: down the hill
Source: MST Wireless
Triath wrote:
All Europe is taking stricter and stricter action versus pollution and CO2 emission. Also if you don't believe in Global Warming (but I would start questioning myself what are you learning in UMR), the resources are LIMITED; I can't believe the level of waste here...
Just because famous people and politicians believe in it, doesn't make it so. The majority of the scientific community is being ignored while politicians hold up the loud few as an excuse to get more power.
Also, as to the limited resources - when something is cheap, it's used a lot by people who don't really need it, and for things for which it's not optimal. When that resource becomes more scarce, it becomes more expensive. Cheaper alternatives are discovered, recycling becomes economically profitable, and research towards conservation of this resource actually becomes profitable. And none of this requires governmental regulation! Amazing!
_________________ heretic^ stars as Samuel Jackson in the summer's newest thriller: Owls on a Forum!
Joined: Sun 08-24-2003 3:47PM Posts: 1049 Location: Behind YOU!
Source: Holtman Hall
This is all Chicken Little crying "The sky is falling." In the 1970's we thought we were on the way to the next ice age (global cooling) and proposed dumping tons of CO2 and other "green house gases" into the atmosphere to counteract it.
Our policy going forward should be to ignore fossil fuels and focus on the future. It is not possible to sustain our use of fossil fuel, the earth's supply simply will not allow it. Instead our hippie tree-hugging friends need to work with the people developing new energy sources to ensure they are clean. It is a win-win. Newer and better technologies can receive the extra funding that all this bickering amongst our selves is costing; less-stress and faster development of improved technologies. After all, the one thing people are not arguing about is the eminent exhaustion of our supplies of fossil fuels.
_________________ "Why is it that we must always choose between certain death and probable death?" ~ Clank, Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction
Sure global warming doesn't exist, and the desertification, the 400% increment of water catastrophes, north polo ice surface decreasing and the batterfly flying in the winter are JUST COINCIDENCES
Amazing! ???????
Ok. Water is less and less available (global warming and pollution) as In India and in Spain, Greek and Africa e probably also some area of US.
Let's say that its price will rise, all the poor people that can't afford to drink will die. AMAZING!
Petroleum will finish, if the supply of alternative energy will not be sufficient, what you will do with you television and car? The construction of energy plant can take several years and only selected people will be able to continue their live regularly until the price of energy will decrease again. Will you be between them?
The same for food, cloths, etc.
_________________ Se non le esce sangie dalla bregna vuol dire che era gia' sfondata -- rulezz--
The biggest problem with resource/GW activists is they believe that, all of sudden, some massive catastrophe is going to take place and we'll all be hearing them say 'we told you so' for not doing anything. The oil supply in the world has been 'almost finished' for decades, and supplies of other fossil fuels for base load energy (such as coal), are still in plentiful supply. Base load energy is at no major risk for scarcity, and especially with advances in the nuclear and coal power industries, the US shouldn't have to worry too much meeting future power demands (unless, of course, people who want to heavily and unnecessarily fine and tax 'dirty' industries drive the companies away).
Fixing things that aren't really problems *maybe* helps few and certainly hurts many (i.e: all of us).
The problem is you assume that people are completely ignoring these potential problems: they are not. There are legitimate scientists and researchers out there devoting entire parts of their lives to finding out what and how much must reasonably be done to assure that we take care of ourselves and our environment properly and economically in the future. Per capita, industry is putting out less pollution than ever before, and while global warming is occurring, there is no true evidence showing an imminent catastrophe and certainly no way to know if we are the cause.
_________________ "You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum