jred321 said:
imagine if man were created and lived its entire life during the last ice age, the environmentalists would have blamed the end of the ice age on pollution and man just because the environment changed from what it was previously
"Imagine if" statements only suggest your lack of understanding of basic reasoning and logic. Just because we can envision a scenario in which simple observations can lead to an incorrect conclusion, does not mean that the simple observations of scientists that think there is human-induced global warning are incorrect.
Personally, I am not in a position to make a claim one way or the other. But I can say that I think that everyone can benefit from reduced emissions that are a side effect of more efficient energy use. "Imagine if" CAFE standards were doubled, then we'd use less foreign oil, the price of gas would drop because of decreased demand, and we'd also pollute less. Or, "imagine if" we invested in designing modular nuclear reactors that could be constructed and upgraded in a an inexpensive and efficient manor, then the price of electricity would go down and might even make coal and oil power plants obsolete. As a side effect there would be less reliance of foreign oil AND reduced emissions.
And don't get me started on SUVs...there has been all kinds of effort placed on getting already efficient small cars to become more efficient. But a little math will tell us that you can save more gas annually by making a 10mpg SUV into a more efficient 11mpg SUV then you can if you take a 30mpg small car and make it into an uber-efficient 40mpg car. It would be soooooooo easy to mandate a BIG increase in SUVs but enviros have a hard time convincing anyone there would be a big benefit. Its almost like we, as Americans, are okay with inefficient vehicles if we know that there are hybrids on the market.
Okay so three ways to beat pollution problems:
1. Development of modular (inexpensive) nuclear power systems phase-out of oil and coal power plants by 2050.
2. Pollution tax on all vehicles based on the quantity of pollution emitted (similar to EU measurements of pollution) per mile x miles driven. When you get your car inspected they note the miles and thats how your tax is calculated. Drive a more efficient vehicle for fewer miles and you pay less tax. Adding $0.01 tax to each mile driven would result in an average tax of $150 per vehicle and, based on 2004 National Highway Administration data, result in a total tax of $28B annually (based on 2.8 trillion driven miles). That money could be pumped back into federally funded research into more fuel efficient cars. Thats way more than all automakers spend on R&D annually!
3. No more non-florescent light bulbs. Period.
