In my opinion, the only way to see real change is to provide financial incentives. If fuel-efficient cars are more expensive than gas-guzzlers, people are going to get what they can afford (even if gas will drive the price up in the long-run). Populations, in general, just aren't capable of combining in an idealistic effort in which they don't personally gain. Even simple things like charging 5 cents per plastic bag at the grocery store make a big difference, because the cashiers are forced to ask, instead of using 20 super-harmful plastic bags for 24 items.
I'm not saying I have the solution of how to do this, just my two cents.
lol ha ha religion is the only reason why airplane technology is still commercially accepted. People accept that they need to pray before and after landing so if that works they are ok with it.
They have no clue that Schauberger, tt brown and even searl had blue prints for flight and energy sources that don't pollute and also never crash. They have no clue because they are sleeping in a religious state. Polluting the planet is only a dream. Wake UP
you guys want a laugh...the TENN. legislature is actualy considering a methane tax bill!!!!! no kidding. To nake Farmers clean up the cow waste so nearby neighbors can not smell it!!!!! If they are not re-cycling it they get taxed!
What can we as humans do to reduce global warming? Little or nothing - the more I read up on it, the more I'm coming to the conclusion that global warming is not man made, and any man made component to it is dwarfed by other things like natural climatic cycles (of which we understand only a fraction as yet).
It makes sense to reduce our energy consumption so that we have as little dependence on imported oil/gas as possible. But the whole idea of carbon trading, carbon capture and so forth? It's bonkers - it's akin to King Canute standing on the seashore and telling the waves to go back. I view carbon trading as yet another financial "bubble" in the making, in which a few people will make a lot of money out of the rest of us poor saps.
Absolutely nothing. However we should be concerned with maintaining a healthy enviroment and ecology. egiv makes a good point when he/she ties economics to it. As long as it's cheaper to be dirty, things will be dirty. Al Gore has created an enviromental scare for political purposes. You can't tax and spend your way to a cleaner enviroment. The same line was going around in the 70's except they were predicting an ice age.
Update: the UK Advertising Standards Authority is to investigate a government-sponsored climate change TV advertisement featuring a bed time story about the catastrophic effects of too much CO2 in the atmosphere (think cartoons of drowning rabbits and kittens and you get the picture). Apparently it's had 350 complaints from viewers who, like me, don't take kindly to the government spending taxpayers' money on blatant propaganda.
I don't watch much TV so haven't seen it, but if you want to read more, here's a link:
The Koch brothers are climate change skeptics, Their business is chemicals, coal and transportation- three areas likely to be hit hard by any moves to a low carbon economy.They have respect for science, though, and...
I'm confused. I've read and heard arguments that global warming is really just part of a natural temperature change process for the earth. I've also read that it's completely man-made? Is it one or both of these? Please...
We always impute global warming to the excess of carbon monoxide in the atmosphere. My theory is the following one : the Vietnam war extended from 1954 to 1975, if I refer to this event in our history is because it is...
The so called "climategate" climate science scandal has already eclipsed Watergate in terms of its global political ramificationsThe article below analyses the Climategate emails and documents, now in the...