Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
The fact is that both candidates are on record for significantly reducing CO2 emissions...Obama has a goal of 80% of 1990 emissions by 2050, McCain's goal is 60% of 1990 standards by 2050.
|
Based on the assumption that Obama will win and will have a Democratic Congress, how is he going to achieve the goal?
Is the question off limits?
Quote:
|
No one is ignoring economic impacts, but to suggest that tough enforceable regulatory standards over time would be catastrophic to the economy, an economic doomsday, is just the reverse scare tactic of the other extreme.
|
Who used words like "catastrophic", "economic doomsday"? I did not. I simply ask questions. I don't know enough about Obama's plan to draw the conclusions you suggest. Do you?
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 02 : 12 : 05-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully Mars
I'm lost. I've read both McCain's and Obama's energy plans. I have yet to hear anyone say let's stop doing this or that tomorrow. All I've heard is let's try to make what we're doing as clean as possible while we try to develop alternatives. The US has historically been on par or above any other country when it comes to developing new technologies. If we can develop a clean renewable energy source wouldn't that benefit us not only ecologically but financially as well? I think we should be putting as much resources as possible into developing an alternative to the internal combustion engine. Hell spend 10% of what we're currently spending on the military and put that into an "X" type challenge to develop a new source of energy. If we could free ourselves off foreign oil we would be more secure and wouldn't need a huge military, IMO.
|
One difference is in the OP. Whatever the guy is to Obama, he said Obama would put CO2 on the dangerous polutant list. What are the consequences of such an action going to be? Why do it before Congress addresses the issue in a comprehensive manner? Aren't these fair questions?