It was a good rally we had here on Saturday; and it was great to see that others in our community thought protecting a livable climate was worth turning out for.
I need to get better at stressing that this is about saving the humans, since that doesn't seem to be the general perception. Folks, you've got about an acre, which must sustain you and your descendants forever. Good stewardship is a must.
One correction to something I said on Saturday: while it's true that acting to effectively cut greenhouse gas emissions will cost only about 10 cents per gallon of gas, that's the initial cost, which will ramp up over time - though it's moot since it's revenue-neutral (so the money collected gets returned to us anyway), plus the increase over time will be countered by cost savings, as people switch to lower-carbon or more efficient energy usage.
(updated 3pm, since the reference provided didn't back up the original example) A hypothetical example of this "switch effect" would be state revenue from tobacco taxes declining, as people respond to the price signal and cut back on smoking.
So your "$1500" could turn out to be less (edited). "Ask me how to make $1500 and get clean air."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Welcome, and thanks for caring enough to donate your time and thoughts toward greater collective wisdom...
Terms of engagement:
* Please be civil.
* * * * Please do not post anonymously * * * (I'd remove this choice if I could, and I may remove your comment if you do) - instead, do this:
Click on the 'Name/URL' radiobutton, then enter your real name (if you're brave) or a pseudonym (if you're not). (You can leave the "URL" field blank.)
Or go ahead and click "Anonymous", but put your name in your comment.
* The Management reserves the right to delete comments (Moderation Certificate can be found here). You can always post it on a blog of your own.
If you run into technical difficulties, please a) accept my apologies, then b) email your comment to aherror2011 at gmail.com with "Comment for [name of this blog]" in the Subject line.
New policy re climate contrarianism comments as of 11/11/2009:
Comments questioning the climate science community's understanding of climate change (97% of active climatologists now believe that the earth is currently warming and that it's human-caused - link) will be deleted unless the commenter:
a) is local
b) uses his real name
c) provides link(s) to substantiate his claim(s)/inference(s)
d) is willing to collaborate on constructing an argument tree, to get us past the usual sterile point-counterpoint-countercounterpoint.
(For people who can't read the above, a summary:
1) Be civil;
2) Don't post w/o giving at least a pseudonym;
3) Don't espouse climate-denial crankery unless you're local and willing to stand behind it.)
Caveats:
1. Comments could be delayed: they are being moderated, and I'm sometimes away from the computer for a day or more.
2. : Perfectly legitimate comments are sometimes miscategorized (by the blogging platform) as spam, & not published. If this happens to yours, please notify me, else I might not notice for a day or two.