Although you're right that 'most' people in the world have enough to eat, a
significant proportion don't. Over 20% of Africans are undernourished
(Table 1 here http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e02.pdf). Sure,
'most' of them have enough to eat, but is this situation really 'OK'? I
Article below. The usual suspects and viewpoints, e.g. :
Pulling vexing carbon emissions straight from the sky might become an
important way to keep climate change in check. As pilot projects move forward,
the prospect of capturing carbon dioxide from the air is growing increasingly
plausible,
Your point and suggestion is well taken. OK is a very loose term. Is suffering,
is famine, is war, is illness OK if one is at the bottom end? While we worry
about warming we might do better to worry about increasing overpopulation and
the bottom end. Is global warming going to take care of the
On Aug 23, 2013, at 12:05 PM, Rau, Greg r...@llnl.gov wrote:
Greg etal:
This is to comment on a line in the EE report you posed, which said:
The transportation sector accounts for 28 percent of greenhouse gas
emissions in the United States, according to U.S. EPA, so there is still a
*The transportation sector accounts for 28 percent of greenhouse gas
emissions in the United States, according to U.S. EPA, so there is still a
critical need for a way to reduce the overall carbon dioxide produced from
mobile sources.*
There is a critical need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions
Ken, Greg, list:
First to Greg (re just earlier message) - I recognized CRD as a typo.
Thanks.
Yes to all of Ken's remarks below .
My additional point was that we (geoengineering list) do have one
company which claims the more you drive with their product - the more carbon
Al Gore: Let me deal with the geoengineering part of your question first.
That’s complex because there are some benign geoengineering proposals like
white roofs or efforts to figure out a way to extract CO2 from the atmosphere ,
though no one has figured out how to do that yet. But the
