Comments DianaJardine has made

Maybe not totally off

Sunstein may be off with China, but I have to agree with him (I haven't read his article, I'm just taking it from this post) about the US. Sure, we will lose some coastline and agriculture will be hurt. But the losses faced by the US will be nothing compared to other parts of the world.

What makes us such an economic might is our economic diversity. While losses to one or even various agricultural sectors would certainly hurt, it might not be devastating, whereas a similar loss to India or an African country would ruin the economy.

Furthermore, I can't really see New York or Miami being completely flooded. Sure, violent storms could cause serious flooding, but you have to assume that complex systems of dykes and sea walls will be erected before Wall St. is underwater.

I don't mean to downplay global warming's threats, but I think Sunstein may have a point saying we won't be the ones worst hurt, and that this may lead the US to put off action.

Diana

yeah

I'm glad to see you don't propose simply washing away all subsidies, end of story.

We all know what kind of a place a "free" market can be.

Diana

sort of

Certainly, the precincts to the east, like the Hamptons, are super rich. But the ones closer to the farm are hardly poor. LI is generally pretty well off in terms of income. We're looking at solidly middle class districts.

Why no response to those of us who took offense to your characterization of Long Island?

Diana

Wind and Solar, to name two

Wind is growing like never before, and is getting cheaper and cheaper. Solar is growing precipitously as well. Renewables combined could supply our energy demands, solar, wind, tidal, biomass, etc.

The advantage of renewables like wind and solar is that, in addition to commercial plants, small scale and individual production centers can be developed to meet demands.

The economics is there, we just need the politics to begin putting most of its weight behind these technologies rather than behind fossil fuels and nuclear.

Diana

different hydrogen tech.

As I understand it, the hydrogen would be burned directly in the planes. No fuel cells involved.

It is a different technology, more like that used in rockets and the space shuttle.

Diana

ways for planes to become cleaner

I'm not rocket scientists, so I'm hoping for some informed responses, but there are two other things I've heard of that might help reduce planes' impact in terms of CO2.

1. Using biofuels, as Virgin plans to do (the efficacy of this plan obviously depends on the efficiency of the biofuel production process).

2. Using hydrogen as a fuel (or does this have its own greenhouse gas problems?).

Diana

Maybe

I hope so. Forgive me for being such a skeptic.

I forgot to mention anything about the carbon trading idea. I find that one fascinating. Once again, it runs the risk of being highjacked and used as a tool to make it seem like something is being done when the reality is the opposite (or like in Europe, not being used to its potential, although I do not fully grasp what happened with their cap and trade system).

However, if done correctly, this idea could address the issue of undeveloped countries saying, "Hey, you had to log your forests and mine your mountains to become the rich power you are today. Now you want to tell us we can't do what you already did?"

If it worked, these countries could benefit from their "underdevelopment" in terms of nature and wilderness by using it as an economic resource to "develop" in terms of health-care, standard of living, and the like. I also like the potential, noted by amazingdrx, for rural/urban relations.

Let's hope.

Diana

A classist tax

My main problem with this type of tax, is it priveledges people who can afford to pay it. Rich people could drive as much as they want, buy gas-guzzling cars, run their ac and heat, etc.

Not that this doesn't already exist to an extent, as the rich have more to spend on whatever they want, but this CO2 tax would only highten any difference between the experiences of a rich American and a poor one.

How about some sort of carbon tax combined with programs that would counteract its downsides, like providing cheaper efficiency programs for people who could not otherwise afford them (cheaper hybrid cars, efficient home heating/cooling, etc).

It's certainly a difficult problem to address: how do you discourage the burning of fossil fuels without hightening class tensions. But it is one we must address.

Diana

Have always been skeptical of these

It's interesting to read this post. I've always had mixed feelings about these things, not only for the reason you mentioned of paying a tax on our sins, but also because I was never confident the investment would do something concrete that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Is there any type of public accounting that could show people something like: "project X was made possible by the X amount of donations. Project X would not have happened otherwise."

In short, is there any way to know that these solar/wind/etc. projects are happening because of the money people give to Carbonfund or Terrapass, and that they would not have happened if it weren't for these funds?

I haven't really checked their sites out much, so forgive me if they address this question themselves.

Diana

Not the only one in the works

Many of you may know this, but this logic is, I think, what is behind the lawsuit in the works to add Polar Bears to the ES list.

Two explorers are trying to cross the arctic this summer while hoping to raise awareness to save the polar bear. Their site is projectthinice.org

Diana

Jaw hanging low

...in disbelief. Though I'm not shocked at all. That's the way our government seems to be. It's so depressing, we need a little humor sometimes, as provided by Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents Dinner, who thankfully included global warming as one of the keys of his roast.

One thing that particularly infuriates me is what is going on with Cape Wind. It embodies both the backdoor/special interest politics of the day and the seeming lack of urgency on global warming. I came across this amusing video from Greenpeace that lampoons Sen. Kennedy for his stance. Pretty good.

Diana