You can comment here as well ...
http://irrationaloptimism.blogspot.com/2007/07/it-is-my-intention-to-destroy-your.html
Marlo Lewis’ column (found here http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11702 ) made very reasonable and fact-based points about what the right tradeoffs between economic growth and CO2 limits are. Including an MIT Study that basically concludes that CO2 cap-and-trade doesnt work!
He concludes RIGHTLY that “Regulatory climate strategies put the policy cart before the technology horse. Not until markets are capable of producing vast quantities of affordable energy without emissions would it be reasonable for Congress to consider mandatory emission cuts.”
Totally true... we should focus on creating energy with low emissions *NOT* on economy-stifling caps on CO2 ... Now, there is a cost-effective method to reduce our CO2 generation by half or more: USE NUCLEAR POWER. By adopting nuclear power for 80% of our electricity generation, the 40% of CO2 from that source (most from coal) could be reduced to nothing. WE can further reduce
CO2 by displacing some of the fossil fuel use in transportation and heating with nuclear-derived electricity.
Why is it so bad to point out that Kyoto-type limits have failed?
If you care about the environment, wouldnt you want to know that cap-and-trade is a sham that wont deliver the goods?
Why the violent reaction from alarmists over this debate? It’s not conservatives, but the AGW alarmists who are over-emotional about it. The silencing of global warming skeptics is all about the stifling the truth of that skepticism. Al Gore lies and claims that sea level will rise 20 feet. what do we do? We should shut up the skeptics who point out the virtual impossibility of this scenario, the fact that even IPCC estimates are around 1/10th of this; and we show this phony propaganda to high school kids. This nonsense is the “Reefer Madness” of our era - cheap phony propaganda.
Yes, Mr Eckharts is compromised: He stands to make millions off the scam of Government spending billions on ‘renewables’ ...
“He also works through Solar International Management, Inc. on the financing of solar energy (SolarBank), and on the development of a new international debt security called Global Development Bonds (GDB) for the financing of sustainable development in the developing countries. “
He will make millions by getting the Government to fund his schemes. His schemes rely on the emissions limits and ‘cap-and-trade’ THAT DON’T WORK. No wonder he flipped out. Anyone who doesn’t consider that to be a biased and compromised position is naive fool.
The nuclear power industry employs mostly well-paid English speaking male conservative engineers with above average intelligence. Half the country will never agree to nuclear power because of that.
I wonder why China doesn't take the nuclear power lead. They have cheap engineers and few lawyers. We should help them design and try out new nuclear technologies. If they have a nuclear meltdown it won't be on our side of the planet.