Which is the best proposal for reducing carbon emissions?
![]() Previous Question Would you accept higher taxes if the government used the money to invest in renewable energy?| Poll Archive | Next Question What is your opinion on nuclear energy? Energy and The EnvironmentComments (8)
No one will accept a carbon TAX
PLANT TREES....they get rid of the carbon, natures way. We lost over 5 million citrus trees in the freezes during 1988-89 and have lost another 8-10 million to development.(This is in central Florida ALONE) Want to immagine what this does to the environment?? Just come to Orlando and see..try to smell the orange blossoms in February now. The Citrus Tower in Cleremont now overlooks scores of housing developments that replaced citrus groves. But, just planting trees?? This solution is too simple for the minds we have in control today!
Goverments around the world will not let their people starve to pay for the feel good carbon reduction acts being concidered today. There is a better alternative to the so called green options presented. Use all available options at once. Drill. Conserve. Reuse. Tax only those whose make no progress in carbon reductions after three years. Provide dollar for dollar tax credits for items like scrubbers and filters, Nuff said!
Seriously?
"Individual companies and residences to spearhead initiatives" amounts to the same old buzz words like "sustainable development" (pollute as much as the planet can withstand). The objective of the industry is purely economic (to make more money)and it has very little interest in investing in innovations to combat pollution. The glaring example is the "decommissioning of the mines process" in Ontario Canada. Previously, the companies just abandoned unproductive mines without taking any measures for public safety. Under public pressure, the mining companies decided on a decommission (of the mine) procedure that involved appointing their own CEOs and scientists to suggest minimal procedures to cover (containment) of the hazardous material . Unfotunately, these half-measures ignored future leaching and seepage of the material and the consequent danger to the human health and well-being.
We have to do all three, and more. There needs to be a global project to clean the atmosphere through a gigantic filtration system. Humanity has to either unite to save our environment or face extinction as our planet no longer supports us. And if we can't get together to save our own lives, then we deserve our fate. The damage is more advanced than we previously thought, and we don't have long to change the status quo.
It's not terribly cool to be an unabashed capitalist, but I just have to say: we are all very fortunate to live in a world with big multinational corporations, including the well-known giants of the energy industry like BP. For-profit entities have fueled the advancement of civilization for more than a hundred years, taking us from horse-and-buggy to outer-space in less than a lifetime. It will be commercial venture that solves our energy problems.
|


I think the best options are for individual companies and residences to spearhead initiatives instead of waiting for someone else to solve the problem. It's easy to point fingers, people need to make their own contributions now.
Posted by KM | June 24, 2008 3:56 PM