Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Are they going to sue the cattle industry next? Methane production from cow farts is far worse in terms of greenhouse gasses than CO2. Perhaps they should sue people next for breathing and farting.
|
This might not be far off... if you read
this press release from Cornell University, you'll see the high cost of producing beef: "...beef cattle production requires [a fossil] energy input to protein output ratio of 54:1." And this is compared to the 4:1 ratio of producing chicken meat. Oh, and let's not leave out the mention of the 100,000 litres of water required to produce each kilogram of grain-fed beef.
But I am, of course, changing the subject... so: I think California is suing these auto companies to raise the profile of the issues of global warming
and pollution. I really don't think they intend on winning a case of this magnitude on the basis of a theory that is still being debated. (Just as with evolutionary theory, global warming and the human impact on global warming will remain a theory for years to come. But does this mean we should ignore it completely?) These auto companies will probably get the picture, but they'll realize that many of their customers might feel alienated if nothing is done about auto emissions, regardless of the outcome.
The way this looks to the public is that California thinks auto companies don't care about the health and well being of people and the environment, so they need to be taken to court in order to make them at least listen.
As a sidebar, what do you guys think about Ford hurting so badly these days? Any correlation to their long-standing, horrible track record on gas emissions?