In the Rush to Help - Global Warming

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The air and water, in the US, are cleaner today than they were 30 years ago.

Environmental Resources for Teachers - History of the Clean Air Act

I see you are talking about just the U.S.....the world is a lot bigger place....that is why this whole discussion has been centered around a world forum rather than just in the U.S.

(and what about all those other comments I made in that post..care to reply to those as well?)

Your souce BTW... (do you keep a list of these conservative sources somewhere? I am amazed how quickly you find extremely biased sources! Resources for teachers indeed! )

FOUNDATION FOR CLEAN AIR PROGRESS

The Foundation “was formed in 1995 to provide public education and information about air quality progress.” (http://www.cleanairprogress.org/about/index.htm; accessed 10/11/01)

“The Foundation is made up mainly of industry groups, including the American Petroleum Institute, American Trucking Association, and Chemical Manufacturers Association.” (The Tennessean, 6/23/98)

“Other companies helped pay for TV and newspaper ads produced by the Foundation for Clean Air Progress, a nonprofit institute funded by energy, transportation and manufacturing companies that operates out of the offices of the public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller.” (The Washington Post, 6/17/97)

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I see you are talking about just the U.S.....the world is a lot bigger place....that is why this whole discussion has been centered around a world forum rather than just in the U.S.

(and what about all those other comments I made in that post..care to reply to those as well?)

Your souce BTW... (do you keep a list of these conservative sources somewhere? I am amazed how quickly you find extremely biased sources! Resources for teachers indeed! )

FOUNDATION FOR CLEAN AIR PROGRESS

The Foundation “was formed in 1995 to provide public education and information about air quality progress.” (http://www.cleanairprogress.org/about/index.htm; accessed 10/11/01)

“The Foundation is made up mainly of industry groups, including the American Petroleum Institute, American Trucking Association, and Chemical Manufacturers Association.” (The Tennessean, 6/23/98)

“Other companies helped pay for TV and newspaper ads produced by the Foundation for Clean Air Progress, a nonprofit institute funded by energy, transportation and manufacturing companies that operates out of the offices of the public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller.” (The Washington Post, 6/17/97)

I can find more. That one was the first to come up on Google. Are we arguing the facts or the source?

Now, you addressed my "approach" and said it had resulted in dirtier air and water. Well, my approach has been used in the US, so that might be an indicator.

[PlayadelSoul]

How about Richard Nixon's EPA
EPA - Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act - Study Design and Results

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

How about Richard Nixon's EPA
EPA - Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act - Study Design and Results

Look, I love the Clean Air Act and all the success it has had..we just need more of it...it has been modified some 4 major times in the past 50 years or so..click here...often making it less stringent than its predecessor Act.

I'm the guy fighting for these types of environmental legislation...the problems are global in nature...and problems continue here as well...the country mountains of un-industrial Western North Carolina surprisingly has some of the dirtiest air around ...........thanks to coal smokestacks in the Tennesee Valley Authority.

Read this to get a better undertanding of the problem in the U.S....and merely go to the EPA website to see major areas of the country with less than good air quality.

Nearly four decades after the passage of the Clean Air Act, more than half of all Americans still live in areas that don't meet clean-air standards.

Have we made progress, sure...has it been enough? Obviously not....the problems remain PDS.

[Just Lucky]

If the Bush admin continues to cut EPA funding we may have difficulty getting fresh clean water for our boards:

Members of the House Committee on Science and Technology’s Energy and Environment Subcommittee today questioned the effects of projected federal budget cuts to environmental research programs at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The President’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) reduces the agency’s overall budget to $7.2 billion, a 5.5 percent cut compared to FY 06.
The overall spending by EPA’s research programs has been declining for several years, with a 5 percent reduction four years ago, and a 2 percent cut in FY06. Between 2004 and the proposed 2008 budget, the overall support for Research and Development at EPA has declined by 25% in inflation-adjusted terms.

Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Reps :: Press Release :: Subcommittee Questions EPA Budget Cuts

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Look, I love the Clean Air Act and all the success it has had..we just need more of it...it has been modified some 4 major times in the past 50 years or so..click here...often making it less stringent than its predecessor Act.

I'm the guy fighting for these kinds of legislation...the problems are global in nature...and problems continue here as well...the country mountains of un-industrial Western North Carolina surprisingly has some of the dirtiest air around ...........thanks to coal smokestacks in the Tennesee Valley Authority.

Read this to get a better undertanding of the problem in the U.S....and merely go to the EPA website to see major areas of the country with less than good air quality.

Nearly four decades after the passage of the Clean Air Act, more than half of all Americans still live in areas that don't meet clean-air standards.

Have we made progress, sure...has it been enough? Obviously not....the problems remain PDS.

So, what is your stance on industrial growth in Africa? Should there be a moratorium on any new industry, before we find a new energy source and completely retool our industrial base? Should the sins of your (and my) energy gluttony be passed on to the Third World? Should we compensate those countries in the meantime, by giving them part of our wealth?

Should we ban all housing within a mile of the ocean? Should we ration gasoline to only the amount necessary to get to and from our workplaces? Should we ration electricity, a certain amount of kilowatts per household?

Changing lightbulbs and upping fuel efficiency standards by a couple of miles per gallon ain't going to do much. Any viable alternative energy source is decades away, even with the weight of business and government behind the idea. You can't argue that we are facing a catastrophe and then claim that "we can do better" is good enough. Obviously, it wouldn't be.

[vieve]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

If the Bush admin continues to cut EPA funding we may have difficulty getting fresh clean water for our boards: Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Reps :: Press Release :: Subcommittee Questions EPA Budget Cuts

One of the most ironic budget cut stories in recent history is this one, from National Renewable Energy Lab's website(bold print my emphasis):

"On February 21, 2006, during the second-ever visit to NREL by a United States President, President George W. Bush told employees their work is appreciated and that he is committed to clearing up any discrepancies in funding.
In his State of the Union speech January 31, President Bush said the country is "addicted to oil" and must wean itself from foreign imports. However, 32 employees were laid off on February 7, because of cuts to NREL's budget for fiscal year 2006."

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

So, what is your stance on industrial growth in Africa? Should there be a moratorium on any new industry, before we find a new energy source and completely retool our industrial base? Should the sins of your (and my) energy gluttony be passed on to the Third World? Should we compensate those countries in the meantime, by giving them part of our wealth?

Should we ban all housing within a mile of the ocean? Should we ration gasoline to only the amount necessary to get to and from our workplaces? Should we ration electricity, a certain amount of kilowatts per household?

Changing lightbulbs and upping fuel efficiency standards by a couple of miles per gallon ain't going to do much. Any viable alternative energy source is decades away, even with the weight of business and government behind the idea. You can't argue that we are facing a catastrophe and then claim that "we can do better" is good enough. Obviously, it wouldn't be.

I do not think we need to take the extreme steps you mention and even if we did indeed need to take those steps, we would not..but, .there are many suggestions out there like cap and trade that seek to make a reasonable response to the problem..I have suggested many others over the course of the past few years.

Check out these links for the NRDC, the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, if you want some ideas of things you might realistically and reasonably do as an individual or what we can do as a country that will indeed help the problem.

You are wrong about the impact of upping fuel efficiency standards...you are wrong about the impact of everyone changing out to the more cost effective CFL's or LED's. And you are wrong if you think we are doing as much as we ought to be doing to more quickly develop alternative energy sources or maximizing our conservation efforts in a reasonable way.

You are constantly fighting unified efforts because you do not believe it is good enough..I just believe doing something better is better than doing as little as we are currently doing.

(PS..It might not be a bad idea to move those houses a bit back from the oceans!)

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I do not think we need to take the extreme steps you mention and even if we did indeed need to take those steps, we would not..but, .there are many suggestions out there like cap and trade that seek to make a reasonable response to the problem..I have suggested many others over the course of the past few years.

Check out these links for the NRDC, the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, if you want some ideas of things you might realistically and reasonably do as an individual or what we can do as a country that will indeed help the problem.

You are wrong about the impact of upping fuel efficiency standards...you are wrong about the impact of everyone changing out to the more cost effective CFL's or LED's. And you are wrong if you think we are doing as much as we ought to be doing to more quickly develop alternative energy sources or maximizing our conservation efforts in a reasonable way.

You are constantly fighting unified efforts because you do not believe it is good enough..I just believe doing something better is better than doing as little as we are currently doing.

(PS..It might not be a bad idea to move those houses a bit back from the oceans!)

Changing lightbulbs and driving cars that get 40MPG is going to help this?
BBC News | Sci/Tech | Climate disaster possible by 2100

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Changing lightbulbs and driving cars that get 40MPG is going to help this?
BBC News | Sci/Tech | Climate disaster possible by 2100

That and a lot of other things HOPEFULLY will stop us from having that POSSIBLE disaster by 2100....I have faith...I have hope...now get crackin' will you and talk more of your friends into doing more to help.

[vieve]

Something we can all do, from the article (a good one, which just emphasized how complex these issues are) PDS quoted in the beginning of this thread is buy locally grown produce whenever possible!
“This is not just about flying your beans from Kenya in the winter,” Mr Goodall said. “The whole system is stuffed with energy and nitrous oxide emissions. The UK is probably the worst country in the world for this.
“We have industrialised our food production. We use an enormous amount of processed food, like ready meals, compared to most countries. Three quarters of supermarkets’ energy is to refrigerate and freeze food prepared elsewhere.
.... But there are other ways to reduce the carbon footprint. “Don’t buy anything from the supermarket,” Mr Goodall said, “or anything that’s travelled too far.”

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by vieve

Something we can all do, from the article (a good one, which just emphasized how complex these issues are) PDS quoted in the beginning of this thread is buy locally grown produce whenever possible!
“This is not just about flying your beans from Kenya in the winter,” Mr Goodall said. “The whole system is stuffed with energy and nitrous oxide emissions. The UK is probably the worst country in the world for this.
“We have industrialised our food production. We use an enormous amount of processed food, like ready meals, compared to most countries. Three quarters of supermarkets’ energy is to refrigerate and freeze food prepared elsewhere.
.... But there are other ways to reduce the carbon footprint. “Don’t buy anything from the supermarket,” Mr Goodall said, “or anything that’s travelled too far.”

Good luck with that. If someone in Alaska wants to eat a banana, are they going to settle for a salmon?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by vieve

Something we can all do, from the article (a good one, which just emphasized how complex these issues are) PDS quoted in the beginning of this thread is buy locally grown produce whenever possible!
“This is not just about flying your beans from Kenya in the winter,” Mr Goodall said. “The whole system is stuffed with energy and nitrous oxide emissions. The UK is probably the worst country in the world for this.
“We have industrialised our food production. We use an enormous amount of processed food, like ready meals, compared to most countries. Three quarters of supermarkets’ energy is to refrigerate and freeze food prepared elsewhere.
.... But there are other ways to reduce the carbon footprint. “Don’t buy anything from the supermarket,” Mr Goodall said, “or anything that’s travelled too far.”

Great idea....check out this very cool link Eat Local

Do what you can...and at least do more than you are doing now. We can ALL do that. Its a start...

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

That and a lot of other things HOPEFULLY will stop us from having that POSSIBLE disaster by 2100....I have faith...I have hope...now get crackin' will you and talk more of your friends into doing more to help.

You want it both ways, Jacko. You want us to believe that we are facing an impending disaster but that we can get through it by making minimal changes in our lifestyles.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

You want it both ways, Jacko. You want us to believe that we are facing an impending disaster but that we can get through it by making minimal changes in our lifestyles.

No, I want us to make forward progess, rather than to stand still with our heads in the sand.