Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
So exactly what are we suppose to be doing again, and how much money do we 'owe' the world again?
|
Ustwo...if you would read the IPCC mitigation report, rather than just conservative, global-warming denial websites, you might have a better understanding of the numerous moderate proposals.
The irony is that this morning,
Bush signed an energy bill that has its core provisions:
- an increase fuel efficiency by 40 percent to an industry average 35 miles per gallon by 2020 for passengers cars, SUVs and small trucks. The standard for cars today is 27.5 mpg and for trucks and SUVs 22.2 mpg.
- improved energy efficiency in construction of commercial buildings, improved energy efficiency of appliances such as refrigerators, freezers and dishwashers, and a 70 percent increase in the efficiency of light bulbs.
While the bill is being characterized by the WH as an "energy independence bill" rather than a "global warming solutions bills", the fact remains that
the two provisions above are among the key "common sense" mitigation proposals put forth by the IPCC.
I should add that Bush was against a`specific mileage standard increase before he was for it, perhaps because this latest bill was veto-proof.
Dare I say that Bush is now showing more "common sense" than the global warming naysayers here?
"We make a major step ... toward reducing our dependence on oil, fighting global climate change, expanding the production of renewable fuels and giving future generations ... a nation that is stronger cleaner and more secure," said the president.
White House fact sheet Energy Independence and Security Act
I would call it a small step rather than a major step...but better than standing still as some might prefer.
Ustwo....are you opposed to such reasonable steps (small or major) to energy independence while at the same time, reducing greenhouse gas emissions?
BTW, you still havent answered my previous question:
Ustwo, tell me, what is wrong with the US committing to a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to below 1990 levels by 2020, particularly if it can be achieved with little or no negative economic impact?