Thank God! A Voice of Reason! Czech President Klaus ready to debate Gore on climate c

#126
#126
TennTradition said:
I think that the discussion in this country hasn't elevated about the "what can you do" of conservation because we haven't seen serious discussions in our government about limiting CO2 emissions. I think that we will likely see a cap and trade system here in the states at some point, if there is no significant turn of events. I think that is certainly the better approach over a tax .. but it will have consequences and will filter down into costs. The problem is that the average American will not be hurt as much by a changing climate as many other people in the world...yet we will be affected by solving the problem. It is really an interesting moral issue if the climate truly is warming because of human influence...we can easily pay to alleviate the problem we create...but certain areas cannot and they are often not contributing to the problem. This is not a hate-America rant by me...I like consuming...and I'm happy to be able to do it. I'm happy to be an American, and I don't argue that we're evil. However, these facts about my view of the world don't change the reality that if climate is changing...we're hurting others more than we will hurt ourselves...which is why we will be very slow to act...practically speaking.
Click to expand...

Hmmm................................

:question:
 
#129
#129
allvol123 said:
I claim there is no cost for inaction on the issue of climate, I thought you were arguing for action and that it should not bother me since I believe man does not affect climate and thus the greenies can "act" all they want and it will not harm the climate.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that you shouldn't be bothered by action on climate. Whether or not man is influencing climate is obviously a matter of fact...the problem is that our knowledge of that fact is imperfect...leading to opinions on the matter. There will certainly be cost of action...but if there is warming, then there will also be consequences of inaction (thus there exist today potential consequences of inaction).
 
#130
#130
volsforever27 said:
I agree with the hmmm, I''m not really sure where TT is coming from here.
Click to expand...

I see where TT is coming from, I wouldn't want to see other people around the world suffer and or die from the lifestyle of the United States.

I guess I question why we are the bad guys in all of this?
 
#131
#131
TennTradition said:
I'm not arguing that you shouldn't be bothered by action on climate. Whether or not man is influencing climate is obviously a matter of fact...the problem is that our knowledge of that fact is imperfect...leading to opinions on the matter. There will certainly be cost of action...but if there is warming, then there will also be consequences of inaction (thus there exist today potential consequences of inaction).[/QUOTE]


So when we spend all the money that the proponets of global warming (oops climate change) want, then 50 years from now we realize it is more indicative of cycles, then what? You just say oops?
Click to expand...
 
#133
#133
TennTradition said:
I'm not arguing that you shouldn't be bothered by action on climate. Whether or not man is influencing climate is obviously a matter of fact...the problem is that our knowledge of that fact is imperfect...leading to opinions on the matter. There will certainly be cost of action...but if there is warming, then there will also be consequences of inaction (thus there exist today potential consequences of inaction).
Click to expand...

Whether or not we influence it to any degree of significance is debatable. It is likely that our knowledge of the facts will remain imperfect and agenda driven for a long long time.
 
#135
#135
volsforever27 said:
I agree with the hmmm, I''m not really sure where TT is coming from here.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm.....how can I explain it better....

I think that Americans will never see serious detrimental effects from climate change. We will build dikes where we need them, we will build desalination plants where we need them, we will air condition where necessary. We can *afford* to do it...and we will. This is why I think we will be slow to act on the issue.

If you accept that man is causing warmer temperatures than would be here without our impact...then this is when an interesting moral issue arises...not just for us...but for any wealthy nation that releases large amounts of greenhouse gases. Moral may not be the right word..but I'm not sure what the right word is. It is similar to one industrial state emitting large amounts of sulfur and causing acid rain on an adjacent agrarian state. The emitting state doesn't really see any of the negative consequences, but they are the ones causing most of the problem. The neighboring state has to suffer the consequences, but they didn't cause the acid rain. Is that an ethical quandary..or what would be the way to describe it?
 
#136
#136
TennTradition said:
Hmmmm.....how can I explain it better....

I think that Americans will never see serious detrimental effects from climate change. We will build dikes where we need them, we will build desalination plants where we need them, we will air condition where necessary. We can *afford* to do it...and we will. This is why I think we will be slow to act on the issue.

If you accept that man is causing warmer temperatures than would be here without our impact...then this is when an interesting moral issue arises...not just for us...but for any wealthy nation that releases large amounts of greenhouse gases. Moral may not be the right word..but I'm not sure what the right word is. It is similar to one industrial state emitting large amounts of sulfur and causing acid rain on an adjacent agrarian state. The emitting state doesn't really see any of the negative consequences, but they are the ones causing most of the problem. The neighboring state has to suffer the consequences, but they didn't cause the acid rain. Is that an ethical quandary..or what would be the way to describe it?
Click to expand...


Once you put it that way I am all for it!

Down with Canada!

:)

:dance2:
 
#137
#137
TennTradition said:
Hmmmm.....how can I explain it better....

I think that Americans will never see serious detrimental effects from climate change. We will build dikes where we need them, we will build desalination plants where we need them, we will air condition where necessary. We can *afford* to do it...and we will. This is why I think we will be slow to act on the issue.

If you accept that man is causing warmer temperatures than would be here without our impact...then this is when an interesting moral issue arises...not just for us...but for any wealthy nation that releases large amounts of greenhouse gases. Moral may not be the right word..but I'm not sure what the right word is. It is similar to one industrial state emitting large amounts of sulfur and causing acid rain on an adjacent agrarian state. The emitting state doesn't really see any of the negative consequences, but they are the ones causing most of the problem. The neighboring state has to suffer the consequences, but they didn't cause the acid rain. Is that an ethical quandary..or what would be the way to describe it?
Click to expand...


But if I accept that, what about China? Or any other industrialized country? Why is it always America? But thankfully, as stated before I don't accept the premise of the whole debate.
 
#140
#140
volsforever27 said:
TennTradition said:
I'm not arguing that you shouldn't be bothered by action on climate. Whether or not man is influencing climate is obviously a matter of fact...the problem is that our knowledge of that fact is imperfect...leading to opinions on the matter. There will certainly be cost of action...but if there is warming, then there will also be consequences of inaction (thus there exist today potential consequences of inaction).[/QUOTE]


So when we spend all the money that the proponets of global warming (oops climate change) want, then 50 years from now we realize it is more indicative of cycles, then what? You just say oops?
Click to expand...

If that were to happen, then yes...I guess you would say oops. It would be like choosing bad monetary policy for 50 years and then realizing you weren't doing it correctly and changing it....what else do you do? What do we do about Iraq? What else can you say but oops..they didn't have WMDs. Just as is argued in this case, there is never perfect information and you must weight the cost of action against the potential consequences of inaction. You must demand that the process is open and intellectually honest ... and then decide when/if you have to act. You could be wrong..this is always the case in matters of policy. I don't know what else to tell you. In 50 years we could find out that climate change was definitely happening and we didn't act just as easily as your scenario...
Click to expand...
 
#145
#145
TennTradition said:
volsforever27 said:
If that were to happen, then yes...I guess you would say oops. It would be like choosing bad monetary policy for 50 years and then realizing you weren't doing it correctly and changing it....what else do you do? What do we do about Iraq? What else can you say but oops..they didn't have WMDs. Just as is argued in this case, there is never perfect information and you must weight the cost of action against the potential consequences of inaction. You must demand that the process is open and intellectually honest ... and then decide when/if you have to act. You could be wrong..this is always the case in matters of policy. I don't know what else to tell you. In 50 years we could find out that climate change was definitely happening and we didn't act just as easily as your scenario...
Click to expand...

But unless you're a soldier (or their families), Iraq will never make the impact on our daily lives that the regulations due to climate change will. You can argue about it from a monetary sense, but there is nothing even close to being clear cut evidence for this. Quite the opposite. In all honesty, I get your point, but this isn't something I want to take a chance with. To me, I just see bigger government written all over this.
Click to expand...
 
#146
#146
volsforever27 said:
But if I accept that, what about China? Or any other industrialized country? Why is it always America? But thankfully, as stated before I don't accept the premise of the whole debate.
Click to expand...

China at this point doesn't bear that much responsibility at all for existing greenhouse gas concentrations..but as their emissions rise..they will share a larger responsibility. The hard question is whether China and India should be allowed to grow unrestrained for some amount of time (as the rest of the industrialized world did) and then start curbing emissions. I argue that China and India currently benefit from the efficiency gains that America invented - and they are able to do more for less than we were able to do when we were a growing nation. These effective emissions reductions were born on the shoulders of American innovation. I don't think that China and India should be exempt from any emissions standards.
 
#147
#147
TennTradition said:
China at this point doesn't bear that much responsibility at all for existing greenhouse gas concentrations..but as their emissions rise..they will share a larger responsibility. The hard question is whether China and India should be allowed to grow unrestrained for some amount of time (as the rest of the industrialized world did) and then start curbing emissions. I argue that China and India currently benefit from the efficiency gains that America invented - and they are able to do more for less than we were able to do when we were a growing nation. These effective emissions reductions were born on the shoulders of American innovation. I don't think that China and India should be exempt from any emissions standards.
Click to expand...

Who will enforce emissions standards.....

Don't say the UN, my blood pressure is already up.

:)
 
#148
#148
TennTradition said:
China at this point doesn't bear that much responsibility at all for existing greenhouse gas concentrations..but as their emissions rise..they will share a larger responsibility. The hard question is whether China and India should be allowed to grow unrestrained for some amount of time (as the rest of the industrialized world did) and then start curbing emissions. I argue that China and India currently benefit from the efficiency gains that America invented - and they are able to do more for less than we were able to do when we were a growing nation. These effective emissions reductions were born on the shoulders of American innovation. I don't think that China and India should be exempt from any emissions standards.
Click to expand...

But if you're going to say that, then Amercia's technology has improved greatly in the area of CO2 emissions?
 
#149
#149
OrangeEmpire said:
Who will enforce emissions standards.....

Don't say the UN, my blood pressure is already up.

:)
Click to expand...

The Montreal protocol worked pretty well...and I think that was within the UN framework :).

If we need to do it, how would you propose a system be monitored? Do we rely on each nation being honest and doing its part? Do we create a new international organization that oversees an international cap and trade system? Do we ignore it and hope that the climate scientists are wrong? Who knows...it may work...
 
#150
#150
volsforever27 said:
But if you're going to say that, then Amercia's technology has improved greatly in the area of CO2 emissions?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Are you saying that our technology has reduced our CO2 emissions? If so, I agree. We can do more today for fewer CO2 emissions...and that enables other countries to do so as well. So, while we grew in a carbon-expensive manner, they will be able to grow in a relatively carbon-cheap manner. We're still emitting, but as efficiency increases we were able to produce more for less emissions. Emissions haven't decreased because growth of production as outpaced efficiency increases.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top