Quote:
Originally Posted by Indigo
We disagree with the idea that containing global warming would cost over a million dollars per person. Driving smaller vehicles, using energy-efficient lighting, and implementing conservative settings for heating/cooling will not only reduce the threat of global warming but also save money.
|
You need to look at the BIG picture.
Fighting global warming will cost Trillions of dollars.
That equals higher government taxes.
You WILL pay thou$ands more each year.
Fighting global warming will raise fuel prices.
It already has. There are over 130 different formulas of gasoline used in the U.S. alone. So instead of getting a "bulk price" on gas at $1.50, you ( and I ) are paying upwards of $3.00 a gallon for "custom made" fuel for just your city. All in the name of cutting carbon emissions.
Double the price of gas costs every person thou$ands more each year.
I've tried compact flourescent bulbs many times, and in many applications.
They are a poor choice IMHO. The quaility of light they give off is poor ( only a few wavelength, not a full spectrum of colors ) and they are expensive, and I have never ever, not once, had one last "10x longer than incandescent". Usually they cost 5x more, and last 2x longer. Some contain mercury. All contain posionous gas.
Okay, less dramatic, but this is costing the nation's people tremendous cash as a whole. CFB's cost each person up to hundred$ per year.
Smaller cars save you cash this week at the pump, but they may not save you money in the long-term... if you have to rent something large for vacations, or for deliveries, or heck, in general, smaller engines wear out sooner ( 10 years is good enough for most people, but larger engines last 20 or 25 years... ). Plus the companies that make steel and plastic will sell less of it. This means wage cuts, or job layoffs for you and me. This costs thou$sands of dollars per person. I know, it gets "complicated".
Research that goes into pie in the sky methods to combat global warming costs Billion$ each year! Wouldn't that money be better spent on health care, feeding the poor, or building more water reservoirs for our every growing cities? Should we really spend billions and trillions of dollars to try and change the weather that may, or more likely, may not work? Or should we put that money to use buliding infrastructure? ( that will for sure work )
You are paying much more than you think to fight a futile battle.
A young person now will need to donate $1.4 million of his/her income spread out over a lifetime to reduce the planet by 1 degree F.
What is the best use of that money?
What will help the most people, in the most dramatic way?
Lowering the weather 1 degree? Or curing AIDS and Cancer?
Building water reservoirs in dry areas? The list goes on and on.
The best minds in the world recently met and came up with 200 humane priorites, all more urgent than fighting global warming, and all at a fraction of the cost. I'll post the link... when I find it....
Peace,
-John
P.S. We all need to conserve our resources. We need to conserve for the RIGHT reasons. I don't care why you conserve, as long as you do. Now, when it comes to using cash out of pocket, there are hundereds of other more urgent, and more easily met human needs that can be met right now, other than Global Warming. I do not deny GW is real, just question its importance. You would be better off doing the same. I care about the environment as much, or probably more than most people. I am only trying to open people's eyes to areas not often discussed in the media.
Lutz: always entertaining
Re: Lutz: always entertaining
about $0.05/mi
about $0.09/mi
about $0.09/mi
$0.0219 / mile*
2/24/2008
Re: Lutz: always entertaining
Re: Lutz: always entertaining
