Keith Hudson wrote:
> At 09:53 14/07/01 -0700, Michael Gurstein wrote:
> >I think this is the best counter to Bush's irremediably self-interested know
> >nothing position on Global Warming.
> >
> >It is not that we don't know enough therefore we should do nothing thus
> >allowing things to change, rather it is that we don't know enough therefore
> >we should not be allowing potentially drastic changes to occur in what we
> >don't know enough about.
>
> This entirely misses the point.
>
> If the present climate change is natural then there's absolutely nothing
> that can be done about it. Global warming could get far worse or it could
> swing the other way. (There's strong evidence, for example, that the next
> Ice Age could start any decade soon.)

This entirely misses the point.

The most harmful effect of CO2 is de-stabilization of the climate, leading
to increased frequency and amplitude of weather _extremes_, which are
destructive independent of an "Ice Age" backdrop (not just "a litte warmth").
There's absolutely a lot that can be done against man-made GHG emissions.


> If the present changes are man-made (against an otherwise stable backdrop),
> then the Kyoto proposals would come nowhere near correcting the CO2 cause.
> Nowhere near. Far more drastic action would be required

We gotta start somewhere...


>  that would have to
> totally replace the fossil-fuel derived productive processes of the whole
> world. It would be akin to a new type of Dark Ages.

Balderdash!  A reduction by 2/3 would achieve very much.  If the USA would
reduce its CO2 emissions by 71.5% (i.e. more than by 2/3), it would reach
the per-capita emissions level of Switzerland.  Keith, do you want to
suggest that Switzerland looks like the Dark Ages ?

Btw, alternative energy sources could easily provide enough energy to
replace all fossil-fuels.  E.g. solar-powered vehicles are already
well-advanced (if you think that E-vehicles are lame, have a look at
www.acpropulsion.com to see how the E-car outruns a fossil-fuel Porsche).
It's not a question of feasibility but of good will (which the oilmen in
the WhiteHouse lack).

Chris


Reply via email to