• Home
• Reviews
• News
• Downloads
• CNET TV

About me

My posting summary

1 to 1 of 1

My comments

• Charles,
  Maybe because you are fed up you haven't followed the debate, and you should have.
  
  You write that you hope we don't get let down again. I assume you are talking about the Clinton Administration's refusal to send the Kyoto Accord to the Senate for ratification. Bush as just continued with the Clinton Administration's policy of rejecting the Kyoto Protocol until the countries that will emit a majority of emissions in the future have binding limits on greenhouse gases.
  
  Bush and Inhofe understand that there are great costs to greenhouse gas controls. You could appeal to their greed, but unlike the members of the US Climate Action Partnership, they aren't trying to screw other businesses through regulation. Instead, Bush and Inhofe are fighting for the little guy who would have to pay the increased taxes or lose their jobs because of greenhouse gas controls.
  
  You note that the Senate is considering S. 2191. If this bill were to be passed California would lose between 129,000 and 195,000 jobs by 2020 and it would cost families between 5,200 and 9,400 dollars a year by 2030. http://www.accf.org/pdf/NAM/California.pdf It might come as a surprise that Bush and Inhofe are working for the little guy, if you examine these numbers it is obvious they want to protect American jobs instead of sending them overseas.
  
  You note that Jim Rogers at Duke Energy is a part of the United States Climate Action Partnership and you would assume he supports S.2191, but he doesn't. He opposed it because it isn't the type of greenhouse gas regulation bill that help his company.
  
  And let's not forget the news over the past week. NPR ran a story about heat in the ocean noting that the oceans have slightly cooled over the past 5 years. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88520025 This is contrary to predictions from the computer models that suggest we need to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In other words, scientists don't know why the ocean hasn't warmed, but it is contrary to their theories. This should at least give us pause before engaging in massive new regulations and dramatically increase energy prices. In reply to: "Why I'm fed up with the global warming debate"

  March 21, 2008

  1 reply