Subject:
|
Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Mar 2001 15:06:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
386 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi,
I'll go to Tom first and Bill second.
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> I personally don't think global warming from our CO2 output is an issue AT THIS
> time. However, if we continue to level all the greenery near the equator that
> converts the CO2 to O2 that is useful to us, it might actually become an issue
> in the future.
Not in terms of breathing, but in terms of heat dissipation, it's
better an issue now when something can theoretically be done about
it. If cleaner plants mean higher energy costs, IMHO the best object
is to use less power. But what's gone on in California is completely,
totally, amazingly haywire. (You're more at the centre of that so
I'm sure you have much more data than I regarding the California
power fiasco. What's up with that, anyways?)
> HOWEVER. The US is the major contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere BAR NONE.
This is debateable. The major contributor of *industrial*, man-
made CO2 to the atmosphere, I'll agree. But one good volcanic
eruption dwarfs the entire planet's annual output of industrial
CO2--I'm thinking in particular of Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines,
which loosed an amazing amount of gas and dust that we normally
classify as pollutants high into the atmosphere--including a huge
amount of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. However, we're
not helping matters by adding to that total, certainly.
> You need to specify WHICH pollutants you are talking about when saying
> the US pollutes less. Also, the US pressures smaller countries in many
> ways to reduce their pollutants, yet does a pretty good job of ignoring
> the rest of the worlds request to reduce ours.
True. We produce some 24% of the world's [industrial] output
of greenhouse gases, much of which comes from our beloved auto-
mobiles. A reasonable intra-urban transit network would cut
into that significantly--but as I come from Detroit, I'm all too
familiar with the stigma attached to public transit outside of
the large East Coast metropolitan areas. Why, driving around
in big, unnecessary gas-guzzlers isn't just a preference; it's
a TRADITION and a RIGHT!
Our targeting of third-world countries in an effort to reduce
their emissions is surprisingly itself a tool of capitalist
domination--it increases start-up costs to a high enough level
that manufacturing companies might not relocate to those areas.
> Bill Farkas wrote:
>
> > I also disagree with Miss Whitman's statement that global warming is a "real
> > phenomena." There are many studies that say it is not. IMO, it's a tool of
> > environmental extremists to punish prosperity and capitalism in this
> > country. Third-world countries produce far more pollution than the entire
> > U.S. does and no one targets them.
Taken together, I have no doubt that the "third world" countries
*do* produce far more pollution than the entire United States--
but seeing as how the lands so-called represent about 2/3 of the
world's population, and the United States about 1/20, I guess
that's to be expected. (Those of us who study the supposedly
irresponsible areas of the globe therefore somewhat piquishly
refer to it as the "two-thirds world," but it's difficult to
overcome the idea that somehow these are nothing more than warts
off the North American coast.) I'd like to see a case of any
particular country of 300 million people (or combination thereof)
or less that shows it producing more pollution than the United
States. There aren't any that I've seen. China comes close, but
only with four times the population.
Besides that, I'd like to see the cites of the studies that
say "global warming is not a real phenomenon". As far as I know,
Carl Ojala was the major proponent of the view that global warming
is chimerical, and he's become curiously silent the last six to
eight years. There's no real argument about whether or not it's
happening, only about the pace, the causes, and the mechanics.
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes: !!!KA-SNIP!!! (...) I finally had a chance to look some things up. Here's what I found in 30 minutes time: (URL) haven't read each and every one of these, so I'm not vouching for them - you (...) (24 years ago, 20-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Who does W. Love? BIG OIL!!!
|
| I personally don't think global warming from our CO2 output is an issue AT THIS time. However, if we continue to level all the greenery near the equator that converts the CO2 to O2 that is useful to us, it might actually become an issue in the (...) (24 years ago, 18-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
