Bush plan to reduce global warming could devastate sea life
- Thread starter ReefLady
- Start date
Dennis7
Member
The problem is the source, you can't just keep putting it some where else. There is not an easy solution to pollution. Not everyone will go along with an idea. You have to cut back, whether its vehicle emissions or garbage we throw out everyday. The earth is only so big and the population is growing rapidly. There is no place to put it. I believe more plans need to be implemented for conservation. Otherwise there will not be an earth as we know it in years to come.
LisaB
Member
I don't think it's because someone's lobbying. The truth is, the "show value" of owning a Hummer (or any other vehicle unreasonably large) is that you can AFFORD to waste gas. Conspicuous consumption is very big. That's why people buy shirts with "TOMMY" in 102 pt type across the chest--so folks will know that everyone else realizes they can afford designer clothes. If a Hummer became something other than what it is, I doubt they would sell as many and the masses would move on to another product that made the statement they want their life to reflect.
Also, it's the auto makers, by and large, who lobby fuel consumption standards. There may be some oil companies, but I doubt they're in the majority.
Also, my husband has corrected me. There is ONE refinery in Denver. He says coal burning power plants are a greater factor in Denver's air, however.
Anybody ready to front the billions necessary to build a natural gas pipline from Alaska yet?
ScottT1980
Well-Known Member
While I do recognize that a good deal of the responsibility rests on the individual, I think some of these bigger business do get a good bit of blame.
Case in point (sorry, I don't know the details but this is supposedly a true story):
A professor of mine in undergrad was telling me a story about a buddy of his who was in environmental research (I know, a friend of a friend but I still believe the credibility of the story). He and his colleagues built a new carborator or something to that effect (I am not a car guy) that would give cars almost double or triple the gas mileage. They were anxious to sell the patents and prototypes to a "green" company so that these could soon be implemented in automobiles. Many oil companies made offers, all of which were refused due to skepticism of their intentions. Ultimatly, a "small" European company presented a nice offer and showed great intentions of marketing this new innovation. THe small research firm decided to go with this company but after the deal went through, it turned out that this so-called small company was in fact Shell. Shell created a small venture in Europe under a different name just so that they could buy this technology. And guess where that technology has gone, probably on a shelf somewhere to collect dust.
Again, because I don't know the details it may seem like this is just a bogus story but the professor was certainly what I would consider a credible source. I wonder how often things like this occur, and if they do, why we don't hear about it more often. I recognize that until the majority of Americans conciously decide that they need to make a huge change in their lifestyle, the United States will continue to come up with band-aids for the problem.
Take er easy
Scott T.
We know more about the environment than we have at any time in history and how delicate the balance is yet our planet is in the worst shape it's ever been, we have made more technological advances in the 100 years than at any other time yet were on the brink of disaster. People are more concerned with their "show value" than they are for the future generations. We can put a man on the moon yet we can't figure out other alternatives for energy that have less impact on the environment. How pathetic we humans are
:hammerhea
:hammerhea
deanerk
Member
So, what you're saying is that if Hummers were more fuel efficient they would be less desireable??? Rich people buy Hummers because they love to blow money on gas and wouldn't buy them if they couldn't? Would they be buying Honda Civics if they got 6 MPG? I don't buy that at all.
You are correct in that auto makers are responsible for very powerful lobbying against fuel economy standards. Why? Because change is expensive for them. Ford recently abandonned promises to make more fuel efficient SUVs by 2005. So, what's the difference really between big money oil and coal lobbying and big money auto maker lobbying? Both industries are responsible for huge CO2 output, more so in the US than in any other part of the world.
LisaB
Member
People will never buy a Honda civic if it only got six MPG because it's not marketed as a status vehicle, but there are tons of cars just as small that get poor mileage that people do buy because they are "status" vehicles. My point is that people want to send the message that they AFFORD to be wasteful. This attitude, of course, is dangerous in that we are also being wasteful with the earth.
But my original point stands--all of these increased standards would result in higher cost to the consumer and American don't like to pay more. We will always buy what we want if the price is right.
Everyone likes the idea of environmental responsibility until things start to cost more or jobs are threatened. Everyone wants companies to front all the costs--unless of course their 401K is invested in that company--then it'd better make money!! I think Americans have gotten too used to being able to have anything they want and it will take a huge shock to shake us out of our bad habits.
But my original point stands--all of these increased standards would result in higher cost to the consumer and American don't like to pay more. We will always buy what we want if the price is right.
Everyone likes the idea of environmental responsibility until things start to cost more or jobs are threatened. Everyone wants companies to front all the costs--unless of course their 401K is invested in that company--then it'd better make money!! I think Americans have gotten too used to being able to have anything they want and it will take a huge shock to shake us out of our bad habits.
HAP
Member
It's great to see such a diversity of ideas and such a range of political views on this board. It is proof that common ground exists for most everyone. While we may disagree with the source of a particular problem and the solution through which to find resolution, we agree in our desire to reach a common goal.
It is unfortunate that we are so busy fighting over political victories that we loose sight on what we are fighting for. Our downfall as a society will likely come not as a result of our lack of technology or intellect but as a product of our inability to put into action that which is necessary because it does not support or selfish personal goals.
Rome fell not because they were unintelligent, weak or incapable of meaningful growth but because they grew amoral, belligerent, wasteful and out of touch with the world around them. Sounds like another society I know...
You see, it is not just the Bush administration with its head in the sand and might be out of touch with reality as we see it from our point of view. Both parties, every party, everybody has a perspective that when discussed sheds light on the issue of the day. Simply because a party proposes a solution (Bush's plan for global warming) does not mean it will come to fruition. It is the way in which a discussion is started. Now if people could get off their political bandwagon and simply discuss the plan and search for other ideas and/or improvements, we might actually reach a resolution without loosing site of what we are fighting for.
hap
It is unfortunate that we are so busy fighting over political victories that we loose sight on what we are fighting for. Our downfall as a society will likely come not as a result of our lack of technology or intellect but as a product of our inability to put into action that which is necessary because it does not support or selfish personal goals.
Rome fell not because they were unintelligent, weak or incapable of meaningful growth but because they grew amoral, belligerent, wasteful and out of touch with the world around them. Sounds like another society I know...
You see, it is not just the Bush administration with its head in the sand and might be out of touch with reality as we see it from our point of view. Both parties, every party, everybody has a perspective that when discussed sheds light on the issue of the day. Simply because a party proposes a solution (Bush's plan for global warming) does not mean it will come to fruition. It is the way in which a discussion is started. Now if people could get off their political bandwagon and simply discuss the plan and search for other ideas and/or improvements, we might actually reach a resolution without loosing site of what we are fighting for.
hap
Last edited:
EdgeKrusher
Member
I appologize for jumping the gun when this thread started. I've just seen these type of deals go sour real quick. I'm glad it didn't happen in here, I guess I'll just keep my mouth shut next time and let everyone say their piece.
Peace
EK
Peace
EK
Craig Manoukian
Well-Known Member
When you look at how we live daily, there is no way to avoid the consumption of non-renewable resources. Economies of scale come into play. Not enough wood on the planet to burn in order to produce the electricity we require.
Everything you wear, eat, drive, etc. used some form of power for its production. Its all economics. Whale oil was used as a heating and lighting source until other sources of energy became cheaper to obtain. Ot wasn't the save the whales campaign back then. Unless we want to turn back the clock and hoof it every where we go, then we are forced to vote with our dollars.
I drive a Yukon because a Honda Civic can't do the things I want to do and is not a safe vehicle IMHO, remember your physics. I certainly don't take any previous comments personally, but owning a Yukon or Hummer does not make you guilty of conspicuous consumption in and of itself.
We are all have a responsibility to do what we can to be good stewards of our resources. I think we are all in agreement on this and while there are many ways to get to where we want to go, we can still move in the same direction together.
:smirk:
Everything you wear, eat, drive, etc. used some form of power for its production. Its all economics. Whale oil was used as a heating and lighting source until other sources of energy became cheaper to obtain. Ot wasn't the save the whales campaign back then. Unless we want to turn back the clock and hoof it every where we go, then we are forced to vote with our dollars.
I drive a Yukon because a Honda Civic can't do the things I want to do and is not a safe vehicle IMHO, remember your physics. I certainly don't take any previous comments personally, but owning a Yukon or Hummer does not make you guilty of conspicuous consumption in and of itself.
We are all have a responsibility to do what we can to be good stewards of our resources. I think we are all in agreement on this and while there are many ways to get to where we want to go, we can still move in the same direction together.
:smirk:You're right about Rome HAP but I'm not talking about the fall of an Empire I'm talking about human survival. Do you think this planet can handle another century of damage to it's environment like we had ??? I don't. People are worried about the financial hardship but the hardships that lie ahead are going to be far worse than people imagine
ScottT1980
Well-Known Member
One thing about us reefers, we are all pretty guilty of creating some pretty heavy greenhouse emissions simply with the amount of electricity required to run our systems.
I have looked into solar energy to help power my system and hell, the state of NC will even pay for half of the cost with solar power but again, the costs up front are more than a graduate student can afford.
Really, if there was a global transition towards environmentally friendly sources of power (hydro, solar, wind, etc...), then the entire market would be flipped upside down. You think the middle east is in rough shape now, take away the importance of their oil and then see what happens.
Progress is slow and decisions are very tough and coupling this with the growing trend of western consumption accounts for our inability to make ammends.
It really is tough and while we continue to look for a few easy solutions, I think they are going to be difficult, if not impossible to come by...
Take er easy
Scott T.
I have looked into solar energy to help power my system and hell, the state of NC will even pay for half of the cost with solar power but again, the costs up front are more than a graduate student can afford.
Really, if there was a global transition towards environmentally friendly sources of power (hydro, solar, wind, etc...), then the entire market would be flipped upside down. You think the middle east is in rough shape now, take away the importance of their oil and then see what happens.
Progress is slow and decisions are very tough and coupling this with the growing trend of western consumption accounts for our inability to make ammends.
It really is tough and while we continue to look for a few easy solutions, I think they are going to be difficult, if not impossible to come by...
Take er easy
Scott T.
ScottT1980
Well-Known Member
Huh? I didn't see anything offensive
Ah well...
HAP
Member
The point of my post is that instead of bashing a man and his plan we should sit down and discuss the idea and look for ways to improve upon it to find a hybrid solution. Too often people line up along party lines and throw stones at each other and pat themselves on the back for hitting the other side while the problem worsens around them.
That is what I see in this thread. This topic of global warming somehow evolved into a discussion about the type of car one drives and how this somehow means they want people to see them as wasteful.
It is a typical partisan pattern to lay blame first and solve the problem when its too late and costs more. If you don't believe me, turn on the tube and listen to the political ads.
I don't want to get off-topic here. I agree that global warming is a problem. I just don't agree with bashing a plan I don't have personal knowledge of and no alternate solution to offer.
Regards,
hap
That is what I see in this thread. This topic of global warming somehow evolved into a discussion about the type of car one drives and how this somehow means they want people to see them as wasteful.
It is a typical partisan pattern to lay blame first and solve the problem when its too late and costs more. If you don't believe me, turn on the tube and listen to the political ads.
I don't want to get off-topic here. I agree that global warming is a problem. I just don't agree with bashing a plan I don't have personal knowledge of and no alternate solution to offer.
Regards,
hap
Last edited:
Craig Manoukian
Well-Known Member
OK everybody, take a deep breath, pull you hands from the the keyboard and count to twenty. Let's not be either too thin skinned nor too thick skinned.
I want to commend everyone for the professional and civil tone that we have displayed here. This is important stuff and as long as we are respectful to one another everything should be fine.
Let's stay on topic, although it is a very long tentacled and far reaching subject.
Thanks :smirk:
I want to commend everyone for the professional and civil tone that we have displayed here. This is important stuff and as long as we are respectful to one another everything should be fine.
Let's stay on topic, although it is a very long tentacled and far reaching subject.
Thanks
:smirk:
I couldn't have said it any better myself. One of my pet peeves is when dialog is halted - threads are closed, because the subject matter is controversial, or "heated".
We are all adults; and I expect that we can discuss *real* issues in a civil manner. There will be no name-calling, flames, or any sort of personal insults.
If you cannot post in a civil & courteous manner, don't post. Simple enough.
That said, I believe that this conversation has been good so far. Let's keep it that way.