06-03-2002 03:27									#31
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Giancarlo These little cut-backs would of cost thousands and thousands of jobs. It would also take money out of the economy, which is arbitrary. Rather the private sector should have benefits when investing in new technology, rather than take this money away and put it in big government. Do you really look at anything else rather than your narrow view point?

How did you figure that one out? These things tend to adjust for themselves, besides the demand for environmentally conscious solutions and their development will provide many, many jobs too. Weigh it up Gianni, it is a change, not a restriction.

	06-03-2002 03:28									#32
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Gian your point losses its integrity when you insult someone.

Provost I agree that there has to be something done, but this is going to be a burnden by the consumer done this way.

Sure there are big cars, give people incentive to buy smaller ones.

Does the Kyoto accord actually give incentives? Or is it just a hack and slash method?

	06-03-2002 03:31									#33
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison How did you figure that one out? These things tend to adjust for themselves, besides the demand for environmentally conscious solutions and their development will provide many, many jobs too. Weigh it up Gianni, it is a change, not a restriction.

No. This treaty specifically demands things from companies particularily money. If we do this and adopt this treaty, we would get stuck with coal and oil much longer than necessary. Therefore the treaty is arbitrary and contradictory. It is all restrictions.

quote: Gian your point losses its integrity when you insult someone.

There was no insult.

	06-03-2002 03:41									#34
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Giancarlo No. This treaty specifically demands things from companies particularily money. If we do this and adopt this treaty, we would get stuck with coal and oil much longer than necessary. Therefore the treaty is arbitrary and contradictory. It is all restrictions.

Only if they don't adhere to guidelines, which is fair enough. They need to adapt and keep up. Sometimes they need a push to get things done, otherwise there would be no incentive to change and be cleaner, after all, it isn't really commercially viable if we are talking about preservation of profits. These kinds of regulation gives incentives. And besides, the installation of new systems will require more people to be employed into various sectors, so the problem is nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be.

The only effective incentive to buy smaller cars is a more progressive tax on motor vehicles in terms of fuel usage/emissions output.

	06-03-2002 03:42									#35
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison Only if they don't adhere to guidelines, which is fair enough. They need to adapt and keep up. Sometimes they need a push to get things done, otherwise there would be no incentive to change and be cleaner, after all, it isn't really commercially viable if we are talking about preservation of profits. These kinds of regulation gives incentives. And besides, the installation of new systems will require more people to be employed into various sectors, so the problem is nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. The only effective incentive to buy smaller cars is a more progressive tax on motor vehicles in terms of fuel usage/emissions output.

Alright what-ever you say, I still disagree. We agree to disagree? Actually, I don't have time to argue... all I can say is these regulations are not incentives. Rather the government should provide subsidies for businesses that adopt new technologies. Restricting it is not the way.

	06-03-2002 03:45									#36
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin There are many kinds of pollutants, some only impact the local environment, others impact the global enviroment. How is that a delusional statement?

I didn't specify just one or the other. So I agree with you. But if someone thinks it's all just local, then they're just silly.

Hell, I drive an SUV. (a smaller one) but one that posters here whine about. I choose it for safety for my family during the winters. BUT, I also choose to buy a smaller more expensive house that is closer to work. So I probably burn less gas every year than a lot of people that have more efficient cars but Drive 5 times farther to work. Who is really helping more here. (since I am closer, there is no pratical public trans)

RAH

	06-03-2002 03:48									#37
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Giancarlo Alright what-ever you say, I still disagree. We agree to disagree? Actually, I don't have time to argue... all I can say is these regulations are not incentives. Rather the government should provide subsidies for businesses that adopt new technologies. Restricting it is not the way.

The international war-judging committee will obviously see that as a victory to you

	06-03-2002 03:53									#38
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Oh goody. Now we need the EU to follow up with a pan-European system of tax-and-trade exchanges for carbon and other greenhouse gases.

By-the-way, anyone else heard that Ireland is planning to build a rather massive wind power plant in the Irish sea?

	06-03-2002 03:59									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Starchild By-the-way, anyone else heard that Ireland is planning to build a rather massive wind power plant in the Irish sea?

How will it work? I would think that storms would mess them up and the maintaince costs for going out to fix them would make them not worth it.

	06-03-2002 04:19									#40
	Got spare money?

There are huge efficiency gains to be made by cutting carbon emissions, aside from global warming.

Less dependence on unstable regions for oil.

Energy efficiency is cheaper in the long run.

Fewer respiritory ailments.

I won't have to clean soot off my windows as much.

More people can have a higher standard of living.

	06-03-2002 04:26									#41
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

In this case, change is a good thing, it keeps us on our toes, it means we have to change and adapt to new problems. Simple fact is, we cannot just ignore them and sweep them under the carpet, because if they are real, they aren't going away!

Didn't bother to reply then Stew?

	06-03-2002 05:17									#42
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

PH, what kind of incentive would you like to see for people to buy smaller cars? Please quantify.

	06-03-2002 05:25									#43
	Increase the size of your Attachments

There is 0 evidence man is responsible.



Case in point: Do any of you know what Methane Hydrate is???? Please do not ignore me. This is significant. Pockets under the ocean spill out 1,000 x more greenhouse pollutants than we do.

	06-03-2002 05:32									#44
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Is the incentive of a cleaner, less polluted environment not enough?

Thought not.

	06-03-2002 16:46									#45
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's PH, what kind of incentive would you like to see for people to buy smaller cars? Please quantify.

I've already stated that quite clearly before I am not going into it in depth again. A more progressive taxation model on vehicles depending on emissions and fuel usage.

And faded glory, I have, but there are many factors involved here. We can verify that natural sources of greenhouse emissions are generally part of an already existing equilibrium. Carbon we bring back into the carbon cycle after tens and hundreds of millions of years if not.

And if nothing else, it should demonstrate that we should not squander a scarce resource unnecessarily, forecasts state that we will run out, like it or not. If we were a little more sparing with our use of oil, it may last for longer!

	06-03-2002 17:25									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison I've already stated that quite clearly before I am not going into it in depth again. A more progressive taxation model on vehicles depending on emissions and fuel usage.

We already have this.

If you use x litres of petrol and pay y tax on that, then surely it would be fair that he who uses 2x petrol pays 2y tax?

Or are you arguing for something totally different? Please be clear and quantify.

	06-03-2002 17:29									#47
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by paiktis22 Americans understand one thing : BOMBS. We get our act together and we go bomb them

Maybe you should take your eco-mercenaries out to the rain forests and protect them from slash and burn agriculture and illegal clearcut logging. It won't be as fun as trolling Americans, but it might be a lot more useful than Kyoto.

	06-03-2002 17:38									#48
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Sikander Maybe you should take your eco-mercenaries out to the rain forests and protect them from slash and burn agriculture and illegal clearcut logging.

Or maybe just make that an emission-reducing project under Kyoto ?

	06-03-2002 17:43									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Roland Or maybe just make that an emission-reducing project under Kyoto ?

Maybe I could get a credit for my tank if I use it to wipe out indigenous peoples for the environment from time to time.

	06-03-2002 17:52									#50
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

"slash and burn agriculture and illegal clearcut logging" - done by some indigenous people, but at such a small scale that the credits would be wiped out by your tank's fuel consumption.

	06-03-2002 18:10									#51
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Roland "slash and burn agriculture and illegal clearcut logging" - done by some indigenous people, but at such a small scale that the credits would be wiped out by your tank's fuel consumption.

Perhaps a light tank. Does Suzuki make a light tank?

	06-03-2002 18:22									#52
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by faded glory There is 0 evidence man is responsible.

Brilliant, we didn't do it, so as the last few people suffocate in their undergrounbd bunker as temperatures of 45 degrees C rage outside can say without any trace of guilt "Oh well, it wasn't our fault, we were right not to try and stop this"

	06-03-2002 18:40									#53
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison And faded glory, I have, but there are many factors involved here. We can verify that natural sources of greenhouse emissions are generally part of an already existing equilibrium. Carbon we bring back into the carbon cycle after tens and hundreds of millions of years if not.

Greenhouse effect is not only due to human factor, maybe.

What we are sure :
Human activity increased significaly in the biosphere the mass of carbon by bringing back fossil carbon.
Human activity is destroying significaly the carbon bio-recycler :
Great forests and planctons.

	06-03-2002 20:13									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

"No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood"


2002 calendar, Despair, Inc

Last edited by Lefty Scaevola on 06-03-2002 at 21:33

	06-03-2002 20:17									#55
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I like that expression Lefty, so true too.

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's We already have this. If you use x litres of petrol and pay y tax on that, then surely it would be fair that he who uses 2x petrol pays 2y tax? Or are you arguing for something totally different? Please be clear and quantify.

You know perfectly well what I am saying. The less efficient the vehicle, the higher the road tax should be...whereas a small car in the UK is taxed in the region of £100, cars over 2 litres equivalent, for example, should be taxed maybe £500 and cars over 3 litres equivalent should be taxed, say £5000...perhaps on a more graduated sliding scale. You get the idea?

	06-03-2002 21:19									#56
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Actually the tax on the gas might work out better. Your way doesn't take into effect a poorly maintained more efficient rated vehicle which might polute more than a higher rated one. Or in my case, a higher rated vehicle that is driven considerably less.

BUT, the big problem still remaining would be the Commerical trucks. An increase in the tax would ripple through the entire economy if shipping costs were to increase to cover the expense. We've seen this tank the economy in the past.

It's all the little details that make this issue very complex, with no simple answer.

	06-03-2002 21:34									#57
	Get a bigger avatar today!

"BUT, the big problem still remaining would be the Commerical trucks."

Would be ?

They are, at least here. Subsidized to no end, wasting resources. For example, they cause most of the repair need on roads, without paying remotely close to the costs. They pollute, noise and emissions reduce land values. They are a collossal misallocation of resources, and if done over 10 or 20 years, cost truth in transport would have its benefits.

	06-03-2002 21:43									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

1. Sun emits radiation with a certain wavelength.

2. The radiation reaches Earth, which absorbs the energy of the radiation.

3. To get rid of that energy, Earth emits radiation with another wavelength.

4. That wavelength is about equal to the resonance wavelength of carbone dioxide molecules.

Conclusion: The more carbone dioxide there is, the warmer the atmosphere gets. Carbone dioxide in the air made a high temperature and thereby life and evolution possible. But too much of it makes the atmosphere too warm.

So global warming is caused by a high emission of CO2. And it is a given fact that the US' share of the global CO2 output is 25%. What else is there to deny I wonder....

	06-03-2002 21:56									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

But what is the percentage of manmade vs. produced by nature?

	06-03-2002 22:03									#60
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Roland "BUT, the big problem still remaining would be the Commerical trucks." Would be ? They are, at least here. Subsidized to no end, wasting resources. For example, they cause most of the repair need on roads, without paying remotely close to the costs. They pollute, noise and emissions reduce land values. They are a collossal misallocation of resources, and if done over 10 or 20 years, cost truth in transport would have its benefits.

Same here, not sure if it's exactly the same. Truck licenses make up some of it, but no where near enough. But not sure if the ratio is the same. Truck drivers whine otherwise.

The main problem is the lack of upkeep on the rail network. While the highly trafficed ones are, the lesser used ones are not. Many lines have fallen into disuse so there is no alternative to using trucks. Personally, I would like to see this addressed, (even though the upfront cost could be huge) But I believe it would help greatly and over time, it could pay for itself.
Unfortunately, the current US GOV, isn't leaning in that direction.

RAH