[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/30/do3010.xml[/url]

[QUOTE]He talks blithely of allowing only "clean" coal-fired power plants, using "carbon capture" - burying the CO2 in holes in the ground - which would double the price of electricity, but the technology for which hasn't even yet been developed. He then babbles on about "generating five million new green jobs". This will presumably consist of hiring millions of Americans to generate power by running around on treadmills, to replace all those "dirty" coal-fired power stations which currently supply the US with half its electricity.[/QUOTE]

Is it so necessary for our elected leaders to [I]continue[/I] destroying business, wealth, and the economy so they can feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside?

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

5 million jobs as what green police to spy on your neighbor. This is a crock is a crock of shit.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=88Mariner;682268][URL]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/30/do3010.xml[/URL]

Is it so necessary for our elected leaders to [I]continue[/I] destroying business, wealth, and the economy so they can feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside?[/quote]

im with you there man. the more i read about global warming, the more signs point to it not being caused my man. also, temperatures world wide are dropping, not increasing...

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

global warming is a joke. check out the sun spots theory. people are easily fooled into thinking that the sun is like this bunson burner with a constant flame.. ahh read up on it and you will realize that the global warming theory is a joke.

Remember Aldous Huxley's Brave New World that we will choose our own enslavement.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

^ i think the point is is that there evidence that man is involved in global warming is [I]slim to none[/I]. Whatever else may cause it is involves several connected events, most notably the issue withe solar cycles.

Hell, there was more evidence that saddam hussein had WMD's than there is of evidence that man causes global warming.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=88Mariner;682285]Hell, there was more evidence that saddam hussein had WMD's than there is of evidence that man causes global warming.[/quote]And still y'all dived into Iraq convinced that it was the holy truth.

Anyways, rather than BS'ing about whether global warming is man made or not, I think it's our collective responsibility to limit our ecological footprint. Sustainable development and consumption in other words.

I'm sick and tired of people whining that green = loss of jobs. Investing in green energy creates jobs.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

I'm all for going green in a way. I am just worried that one day I won't be able to set the heat in my house to be as warm as I want it to (maybe because I'm sick or maybe I just fucking want it warmer) . If Obama gets his way the US is going to be paying a carbon tax and restrictions on freedoms that we all took for granted will be taken away and controlled by the government.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[QUOTE=KinKyJ;682414] Anyways, rather than BS'ing about whether global warming is man made or not, I think it's our collective responsibility to limit our ecological footprint. Sustainable development and consumption in other words.

I'm sick and tired of people whining that green = loss of jobs. Investing in green energy creates jobs.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Take global warming out of the equation, and there are still tons of reasons to try to live greener lives.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=toasty;682479]Exactly. Take global warming out of the equation, and there are still tons of reasons to try to live greener lives.[/quote]

reasons to live greener lives = / = economic policies obama wants to implement (bush and mccain were for those too), especially the carbon tax... big problems there

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=shosh;682490]reasons to live greener lives = / = economic policies obama wants to implement (bush and mccain were for those too), especially the carbon tax... big problems there[/quote]Stop driving fuel guzzeling cars, invest in clean technology, stop being a lazy fuck and take your bike to go to the bakery, don't leave all your house lights on (cut down electricity wasting in general) and the tax is not a problem.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=KinKyJ;682534]Stop driving fuel guzzeling cars, invest in clean technology, stop being a lazy fuck and take your bike to go to the bakery, don't leave all your house lights on (cut down electricity wasting in general) and the tax is not a problem.[/quote]

still no need for carbon tax. i drive whatever the fuk i want

i did make a mistake there, i was actually thinking of cap and trade, not carbon tax, but reasons are valid against carbon tax as well

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=KinKyJ;682534]Stop driving fuel guzzeling cars, invest in clean technology, stop being a lazy fuck and take your bike to go to the bakery, don't leave all your house lights on (cut down electricity wasting in general) and the tax is not a problem.[/quote]

The united states and its metropolitan areas are not like belgium, or any other european country, where everything is a short bike ride away. Besides, who has the time to go ride a bike? A car can do several errands in a quarter of the time it would take to use a bike. We're a highly productive group of people, working way, way more than other countries do. Wasting time on a bike is counter-productive, particularly when the impact is, for arguments sake, [I]zero[/I].

I'm all for green-technology, but it has to be more cost-efficient than the present technology. If/when I build my own house, I'll be installing solar panels (costly at first, but pay for themselves over time). I would like to possess a rainwater collector, a greenhouse, and natural insulation (ie, build against/within the side of a hill).

Investing in green technology requires a return on said investment, and right now it does not appear to be a time to throw wads of cash away in hoping something will work. I'm all for driving a $15,000 electric car, it's just not going to pop up on the market anytime soon. Furthemore, the environmentalists [I]must[/I] embrace nuclear power. To do otherwise is to suggest we tie our hands behind our backs and resort to horse and buggy. Nonsense. Right now there is a company developing backyard nuclear powerplants that are cheap, efficient, and largely clean and safe. Environmentalists would do well do jump on board this train.

THE [U]ONLY[/U] true selling point for green technology is that it is cheaper and allows people to save money, in the short or long run. And until environmentalists embrace this concept and [I]ditch[/I] the bullshit "save the children and animals of the future" argument, they're going to have a [I]very[/I] difficult time selling thier ideology qua technology.

But one cannot seriously argue that the United States is a the biggest polluter. Sure, we do pollute, but [I]look at Russia and China[/I]. The amount of shit they've thrown into the environment, and the type of stuff they're polluting with should make your jaw drop. I'm not saying the citizens of the United States are not culpable, but we do a pretty damn good job in keeping things clean by comparison.

Now that I think about it, there is exactly [I]one[/I] product the environmentalists should come up with that would largely solve thier alleged problems they have thier collective panties all in a bunch about

Teleportation.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

if you decide to go with electric cars then the price of copper will skyrocket and will cost double or triple to wire your own homes. Also the pollution that copper plants put out is crazy (honestly it could be the dirtiest material to make). Electric cars aren't the answer to stopping pollution.

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

[quote=runningman;682621]if you decide to go with electric cars then the price of copper will skyrocket and will cost double or triple to wire your own homes. Also the pollution that copper plants put out is crazy (honestly it could be the dirtiest material to make). Electric cars aren't the answer to stopping pollution.[/quote]

oh well fuck. I guess electric cars are out of the fucking question.

enlighten us, what [I]is[/I] the answer to stopping pollution?

Re: Kyoto Treaty pt Deux

What do people think of the Pickens Plan? I haven't looked into it in detail, but my understanding is that it focuses more upon the commercial transportation side of things, i.e., 18 wheelers. Wild oversimplification to follow, but I guess the idea is that no electric motor is going to power a big rig efficiently, so why not switch them to running on natural gas, such that it really doesn't matter what passenger cars use for power, because they are a drop in the bucket in terms of fuel usage compared to commercial vehicles anyway.

I honestly don't know enough about it to have an opinion on it -- even this is second hand to me -- but it's an intriguing idea and let's face it, T. Boone Pickens knows a thing or two about energy...