Comments on: Walking the Walk

By: matt

matt — Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:02:10 +0000

So, it doesn’t count … that bit about moving the manufacturing emissions to China. Agreed. But who pushed for/allowed China and India to be excluded and who was opposed to that. The US was opposed to them being excluded, so actually they would like China’s portion of world CO2 emmissions counted. I don’t see your point. Flea? Your grass hut may be renewable, but it will never be renewable enough. Or, they’ll find fault with some other way you run your life. Given the choice, i swear i would rather be ruled by islamists as opposed to environmentalists.

By: Flea

Flea — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:08:45 +0000

KevinG –
We can reduce carbon emissions to practically nothing by the simple expedient of destroying the economy and ceasing all productive activity. I for one am looking forward to living in my renewable resource grass hut. Another plus: the lack of electricity will mean my computer won’t work and consequently I will not exposed to simple-minded twaddle like your comment.

Cheers!

By: KevinG

KevinG — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:01:53 +0000

“are using regulations, tax policy and fines”

Oops, strike fines from that list.

By: KevinG

KevinG — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:13:33 +0000

Jay-

A ton of CO2 emitted in Ohio is the same as a ton of CO2 emitted anywhere else. Since the objective is to lower the amount of greenhouse gas that is emitted into the atmosphere moving emissions from one country to another hardly seems like it is solving anything.

It also seems odd that you would champion moving emissions from one country to another while calling it a reduction and condemn the moving CO2 reductions from one country to another as a part of Kyoto.

It is also worth noting that, to the extent that CO2 regulations exist, the US federal government has downloaded them to the states which are using regulations, tax policy and fines to achieve any real reductions that have taken place. The “market” has achieved none.

By: Ian Welsh

Ian Welsh — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 10:19:17 +0000

They’ve done better than us on the greenhouse front because they’ve lost manufacturing at a lot faster clip than we have.

Also we cheat.

By: jay

jay — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 08:37:49 +0000

Well Robert, it seems thay have and we have not…nor, of course have the Europeans. Fact is that the US has, more or less by letting markets work, reduced its emissions faster than all the blow hards signed up to the Kyoto fraud.

And, Robert, much as I enjoy your comments, a wee bit of temperance in language would help make whatever points you have.

By: Robert McClelland

Robert McClelland — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 05:53:25 +0000

They haven’t reduced anything, you fool. They’re still shitting on the planet at a faster rate every year and it’s worse because their turds are enourmous. You can blame Martin for his lack of action but you only look like a moron holding up the US as an example of how to deal with the problem.

By: Sean

Sean — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 23:05:15 +0000

“Since Kyoto was signed, Canada’s greenhouse-gas emissions have gone up 24 per cent over 1990 levels, while U.S. emissions have climbed 13.3 per cent from 1990 to 2003.”

That’s probably because all of their manufacturing has moved to China. It’s all Wal-mart’s fault, those anti-union bastards.