Comments on: Time to Act, Not Despair http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/ Blogging the science and policy of global warming Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:00:21 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Climate 411 » That Scary Washington Post Article - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-907 Climate 411 » That Scary Washington Post Article - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:11:28 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-907 [...] still leaves you worried, take heart from something economist Nat Keohane wrote in his post "Time to Act, Not Despair": Again and again, American entrepreneurs and investors have shown the ability to solve [...] [...] still leaves you worried, take heart from something economist Nat Keohane wrote in his post "Time to Act, Not Despair": Again and again, American entrepreneurs and investors have shown the ability to solve [...]

]]> By: rkcannon http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-640 rkcannon Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:02:07 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-640 I've looked at Dr. Chameides's "series" and it did not change my mind because of its lack of depth, glossing over of details and rebuttals of others. His reasoning of why the earth itself could not be warming the atmosphere (because it is transferring more heat) was not thorough or convincing. The science is by no means settled- just look at the rebuttals of prominent scientists. Please see http://www.climatescience.org.nz/ I've looked at Dr. Chameides's "series" and it did not change my mind because of its lack of depth, glossing over of details and rebuttals of others. His reasoning of why the earth itself could not be warming the atmosphere (because it is transferring more heat) was not thorough or convincing. The science is by no means settled- just look at the rebuttals of prominent scientists. Please see

http://www.climatescience.org.nz/

]]> By: Sheryl Canter http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-639 Sheryl Canter Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:05:21 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-639 Bill Chameides - member of the National Academy of Science and science advisor to Environmental Defense - wrote a series on "<a href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/06/14/human_cause-1/" rel="nofollow">How We Know Humans Cause Global Warming</a>". If that series doesn't answer every question you have, click on the <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/category/science/" rel="nofollow">Science</a> category or do a search on "Chameides". We've addressed Mars, the Sun, etc., etc. I won't repeat it all here. Humans are causing global warming. Bill Chameides – member of the National Academy of Science and science advisor to Environmental Defense – wrote a series on "How We Know Humans Cause Global Warming". If that series doesn't answer every question you have, click on the Science category or do a search on "Chameides". We've addressed Mars, the Sun, etc., etc. I won't repeat it all here. Humans are causing global warming.

]]> By: rkcannon http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-638 rkcannon Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:59:54 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-638 The rebuttals I've seen say the "greenhouse" gases do not lead global warming but follow it. And global warming is cyclical going back thousands of years. Greenland was green for a few hundred years. Mars is warming also. They say the sun is causing the warming. So it seems that we can't do much about it. Still we need alternative energies but we don't need the carbon credits and sales between countries etc. that will be just a tax on developed nations, and the middlemen will take most of the money. That money should be used for developing the technologies needed. The discussions are incredibly biased that man is the cause of global warming. Why is this? The science does not support this, and many many scientists do not support it, the vast majority. So why the statement that there is a "consensus"? This is a lie and deception! You will lose all your credibility when found to be wrong. The rebuttals I've seen say the "greenhouse" gases do not lead global warming but follow it. And global warming is cyclical going back thousands of years. Greenland was green for a few hundred years. Mars is warming also. They say the sun is causing the warming.

So it seems that we can't do much about it. Still we need alternative energies but we don't need the carbon credits and sales between countries etc. that will be just a tax on developed nations, and the middlemen will take most of the money. That money should be used for developing the technologies needed.

The discussions are incredibly biased that man is the cause of global warming. Why is this? The science does not support this, and many many scientists do not support it, the vast majority. So why the statement that there is a "consensus"? This is a lie and deception! You will lose all your credibility when found to be wrong.

]]> By: mike http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-637 mike Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:16:55 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-637 Yes, what Nat has to say is a fast growing sentiment held by those who are keeping a vigilant eye not only on the science but the environments in which we live. At the grass roots level it may be surprising to some just how much is going on to look for solutions. What we have to remember to keep the discussion concerning global warming effects out of the constant arguing arena is that these man made pollutants may not contribute to warming but does that mean that we should continue to watch them pollute our air and water while our health continues to fail? Deal with this issue for what the consequences of non-action are to our overall health and we will quickly find solutions because we ALL will agree. And, I do offer a solution. Right now there is a technology that is currently being blended with Diesel fuel in the STate of Texas supported by the EPA. This very cost effective emissions lowering additive, not only significantly lowers all emissions but also lowers fuel consumption by well over 5%. It is used to lower emissions in the State's non-attainment areas and has so far exceeded all expectations. It could be blended with all diesel fuel in the Nation and greatly reduce emissions and fuel consumption. Give it a look at www.visconusa.com. Yes, what Nat has to say is a fast growing sentiment held by those who are keeping a vigilant eye not only on the science but the environments in which we live.
At the grass roots level it may be surprising to some just how much is going on to look for solutions. What we have to remember to keep the discussion concerning global warming effects out of the constant arguing arena is that these man made pollutants may not contribute to warming but does that mean that we should continue to watch them pollute our air and water while our health continues to fail? Deal with this issue for what the consequences of non-action are to our overall health and we will quickly find solutions because we ALL will agree.
And, I do offer a solution. Right now there is a technology that is currently being blended with Diesel fuel in the STate of Texas supported by the EPA. This very cost effective emissions lowering additive, not only significantly lowers all emissions but also lowers fuel consumption by well over 5%. It is used to lower emissions in the State's non-attainment areas and has so far exceeded all expectations. It could be blended with all diesel fuel in the Nation and greatly reduce emissions and fuel consumption. Give it a look at http://www.visconusa.com.

]]> By: K Austin http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/comment-page-1/#comment-636 K Austin Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:50:23 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/12/12/time_to_act/#comment-636 I agree with you 100%. I mentioned in my response to Ross Gelbspan that we must take human nature into account in our solutions. Innovation and meeting market needs will happen if the opportunities are there. Despair does none of us any good. Big Brother of the Government is a partner but not the answer. They can create a level playing field by law, but cannot innovate the way the private sector can. If profit is not part of the picture, nothing will happen, I guarantee it! Sincerely I agree with you 100%. I mentioned in my response to Ross Gelbspan that we must take human nature into account in our solutions. Innovation and meeting market needs will happen if the opportunities are there. Despair does none of us any good. Big Brother of the Government is a partner but not the answer. They can create a level playing field by law, but cannot innovate the way the private sector can. If profit is not part of the picture, nothing will happen, I guarantee it!

Sincerely

]]>