Draginol Draginol

Do you REALLY want to do something about CO2 emissions?

▼

Do you REALLY want to do something about CO2 emissions?

Or do you just want to feel good about yourself?

from JoeUser Forums

One of the things that I find maddening about the American left is its penchant for saying something is bad or that something should be done and then sitting back and doing nothing themselves about it.

Whether the case be health care (where they simply expect other people to pay for their "compassion") or more notoriously, global warming.

The United States produces (for now) the most CO2 on the planet.  Eventually China will catch up (who isn't govered by Kyoto incidentally - and people wonder why the US rejected it) and far surpass the US in CO2 emmissions because environmentalism is just a catch phrase there.

So do you believe CO2 from humans is primary causing global warming? And if so, do you think it is a life threatening thing?

Then morally, aren't you obligated to do something about it? Right now?

  1. Commuting to work more than 10 miles one way.  One third of our CO2 emissions come from driving.  It's not the gas mileage that's the problem. Nobody likes to talk about our dirty little secret: Americans drive too much.  If you're driving more than 20 miles a day, you're part of the problem. Quit it. Move closer to your job. Don't say you can't. You can. You just don't want to.   If CO2 generated global warming is really a global crisis, how can you sit back and do nothing?
  2. Get rid of your air conditioner. Electrical Power for homes represents nearly 40% of our CO2 emissions. Eliminate that second refrigerator. Get rid of the outdoor lights. Get rid of that dryer. Don't take baths, shower instead.  Don't say you can't. You can. If it's the difference between life and death, you certainly can. Quit watching TV. A typical TV uses far more power than a typical computer.  You may not want to but if global warming is the end of the world, it's the least you can do.
  3. No more long distance vacations. Whether you're driving (which is worse) or flying, there's no justification for driving or flying to a vacation destination. Not if lives are on the line.

If you truly believe that human produced CO2 is the root cause of global warming and that it will result in the deaths of millions, then how can you possibly not do the above 3 things?

politics
39,817 views 105 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, that would be correct Daniel, big houses require more power than little houses.
Do you consider 4000 sq ft little?  Here's what it looks like to me, Bush is actually DOING something with personal conservation instead of going around, partying with celebs, telling the little people what they should and shouldn't be doing.  Gore lives in a masion that uses a years worth of energy in a month.  He jets all over the world and then expects people to take him seriously when he tells them to quit driving their SUV.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
And you don't have to look long and hard to see where Al Gore is FAR more wasteful than the average American, but chooses to gloss over it because he purchases "carbon credits" under the idea he can pollute all he wants, as long as he writes a check. If we were in imminent danger, doesn't it seem Mr. Gore would be leading the way in being environmentally responsible?


If you understood the principle of carbon-credit market, you would not say that. The idea is exactly that: buy credits, and the "polluting responsability" will be shifted to the seller.

The idea behind carbon-credit is economic efficiency, in order to make it more profitable (and less costly) to people (read: businesses) who pollute a lot and want to change their equipment, while allowing the people who pollute - but that it would be impratical for them to change their equipment altogether - to simply buy the excess carbon credit out of the companies that have them.

That way, it creates the economic advantage of being a non-polluter, or even create ways to absorb the CO2 in the air (canadian company have invented such patent). Before the credit-carbon market, nobody would have had any advantage to invent such patent (no money to make).
ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
DrGuy, I agree with you here. (But I do think Gore's home renovations point to that concern, regardless of WHEN he did them) Still, big houses, in fact houses themselves, are not as necessary as we make them out to be. I live in a small condo. I am happy here. I wish I had more control over my utilities than I do, though. I wish they would let me garden. I wish they would let me compost. (They being the Condo Association). But it is an existing structure and not a built for me structure so I make due and I do what I can.

My Little Honey, on the other hand, wants a house. So, Little Honeys being what they are, our condo is for sale. We could move back to the mountains, but winter approaches and the temps at 9000 feet are a tad chilly. When we do buy another house, I plan to install solar panels, a water collection system, like the one I have on our mountain house, and other little environmentally friendly items.

See ya.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wish they would let me garden.


buy an empty lot.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
JillUser: Do you consider 4000 sq ft little? Here's what it looks like to me, Bush is actually DOING something with personal conservation instead of going around, partying with celebs, telling the little people what they should and shouldn't be doing. Gore lives in a masion that uses a years worth of energy in a month. He jets all over the world and then expects people to take him seriously when he tells them to quit driving their SUV.

Sorry, I am lost here. I do not think 4000' is little. Its very large and as a result takes more energy, even when fitted with energy saving components, than say a house like mine (960 sq ft) I admire the Bush family for doing what they did. Their home sounds just right, though I cannot imagine living in Texas. He jets all over the world for his work. What, you expect him to walk? Bush jets as well. And so?

People really need to evaluate the message and not misplace so much energy on the personality.

Be well.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
Daniel, great tip. I do happen to live in the desert, though, and an empty lot is well, pretty darned empty, with the exception of the occasional rattler, cactus, or mesquite bush.

See ya..
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Daniel, great tip. I do happen to live in the desert, though, and an empty lot is well, pretty darned empty, with the exception of the occasional rattler, cactus, or mesquite bush.



funny thing with deserts. you just have to add water.


examples utah, isreal, sinah.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you understood the principle of carbon-credit market, you would not say that. The idea is exactly that: buy credits, and the "polluting responsability" will be shifted to the seller.


I'm not stupid, cikomyr, but I thank you for condescending to me all the same.

Is it wrong to pollute the environment, or not? If it is wrong, it makes no difference whether someone has purchased a billion carbon credits, or none; the damage has been done. What you are suggesting is that the wealthy and the privileged have a right to live as wasteful gluttons while the poor need to live like crap because we can't afford the carbon credits. Ironic, considering your position as "championing the poor".

What you're saying, cikomyr, is we can have as many Three Mile Islands, as many Exxon Valdez oil spills as the companies want to have...as long as they pony up the dough, it's all good. Frankly, that position is FAR MORE repugnant than the position of not doing anything!
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sometimes I think I'd be better off in that mountain monastery of mine. Its so much quieter there. On the other hand, if I were there, I wouldn't be here talking with you.

I am glad that you are here to converse here. For we are all better off in the sharing.

Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you understood the principle of carbon-credit market, you would not say that. The idea is exactly that: buy credits, and the "polluting responsability" will be shifted to the seller.


This is, I'm sorry to say, the most idiotic explanation (excuse) I have ever read. I can not believe someone actually excuses creating more pollution. Maybe we should come up with a murder credit too, then we can shift the murder resposability to the sellers.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply By: So Daiho Hilbert
People really need to evaluate the message and not misplace so much energy on the personality.


That’s exactly right, Al’s credibility on this issue is irrelevant. Is anyone here actually basing their opinion on climate change causes and what if anything should be done about it on what Al Gore says? He’s not a climatologist; he doesn’t understand climatology any better than we do. We should base or opinions on what the people in the specific field of climatology are telling us. I should think the GW skeptics would be pleased he doesn’t have better credibility.

People with power and influence can serve a very valuable service to the community if they chose by raising awareness on important issues. Even if they don’t truly believe the issue they’re spreading, their motivations are irrelevant unless they are the source of the issue, I don't think Al Gore discovered global warming.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
Double post
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top
Al’s credibility on this issue is irrelevant.


i am getting tired of the left saying do as i say not as i do. or having their flunkies say it for them.
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
If it is such of a weakening to america, then why most the european countries that managed to mee Kyoto's accords actually have a better economical health than America?

Which European country has a better economical health than America?

Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
Al’s credibility on this issue is irrelevant. Is anyone here actually basing their opinion on climate change causes and what if anything should be done about it on what Al Gore says? He’s not a climatologist; he doesn’t understand climatology any better than we do.


So if I go around screaming about global warming and using other peoples research to prove it, can I get a Nobel Peace Prize as well? Hell I would deserve 2 of them since I won't be using private jets, I create way less CO2 than he does and I waste less energy than he does.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
then why most the european countries that managed to mee Kyoto's accords actually have a better economical health than America?



1 kyotos accords were designed to punish the country with the leading economy at that time.


2 the country with the leading economy at that time is the same country with the leading economy at this time.
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
global warming=slow down american economy so that the rest of the world can catch up.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
So if I go around screaming about global warming and using other peoples research to prove it, can I get a Nobel Peace Prize as well? Hell I would deserve 2 of them since I won't be using private jets, I create way less CO2 than he does and I waste less energy than he does.


This is not the first time they've given one of these away to someone who didn't deserver it.
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
Which European country managed to meet Kyoto's accords?
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top

Is it wrong to pollute the environment, or not? If it is wrong, it makes no difference whether someone has purchased a billion carbon credits, or none; the damage has been done. What you are suggesting is that the wealthy and the privileged have a right to live as wasteful gluttons while the poor need to live like crap because we can't afford the carbon credits. Ironic, considering your position as "championing the poor".

Bingo!  Buying carbon credits does nothing to reduce your output.  It is like Buying Indulgences.  You can still sin as much as you want, as long as you have enough money to salve your soul.  Same thing here.

Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is just another version of the "Why don't liberals start more charities?" post. Next: Why don't all Christians move to Iraq? Don't they truly believe Christ told them to spread the good news to all those who don't believe?

Maybe those people decided to start charities and now they don't have time to cut their emissions.

I personally went the last five years without a car, live in a 273-square foot apartment, don't watch TV, and carpool on my annual vacation to GenCon. Am I holy enough to comment on CO2 emissions now? Gee, what a penance you have to make to be a liberal. Maybe I should switch to being a conservative. I can advocate my conservative value system of "the system works just fine exactly as it is" without having to give up a thing.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
bush is anti environment. his ranch is Geo thermally heated and cooled. he got lucky and his house was built over a hot spring.


Probably not luck -- he bought the ranch as a campaign prop before his first run for Texas governor, so it was probably selected partially on its fuzzy wuzzy factor. I'm actually surprised that Gore never did that kind of thing to his home. Maybe all these people bought their houses in an era when people didn't look at politicians' houses, or when it was a big grand house instead of a green house that got you respect?
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
live in a 273-square foot apartment,


That's a luxury you have of being single, noumenon. Try living in a small house or apartment if you have children, and I assure you, the children will be removed.
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is not the first time they've given one of these away to someone who didn't deserver it.


I'm glad you agree.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's a luxury you have of being single, noumenon. Try living in a small house or apartment if you have children, and I assure you, the children will be removed.


people don't think about other peoples circumstances. they just think about theirs.

like gene keeps saying brad makes to much money. but how does he know. he doesn't know what brads circumstances are. maybe brads got a relative with cancer.

you cannot go by what your circumstances are when you want to take something away from others just because it feels good at the moment.