<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Again]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Billhook</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/bush-pushes-climate-meeting-shuns-solution/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 23:40:39 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/bush-pushes-climate-meeting-shuns-solution/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>G8 &quot;realistic&quot; at 50% x 2050 ???</strong></p><p>That Bush nixed an effort by the G8 members for agreeing a 50% cut by 2050 <br>
was sheer denialist circus -<br>
for that target was not remotely "realistic" as you suggest.</p><p>
In fact it was merely a random pair of numbers, chosen for their roundness,<br>
in total denial of scientific advice.</p><p>
Their adoption would have generated a CO2 concentration of way over 550ppmv,<br>
effectively garanteeing the feedback loops running the climate into a catastrophic instability.</p><p>
For the record, back in 1990, the IPCC advised that just to stop adding to the problem of excess airborne GHGs<br>
we will need to cut our global output of them by 60% to 80%.</p><p>
Until the day we have done so, we will continue to worsen the problem.</p><p>
So, apart from the photo-ops, what would be the point of agreeing a nonsense target,<br>
&nbsp;for more than four decades hence,<br>
&nbsp;with an utterly corrupt American regime ?</p><p>
Regards,</p><p>
Bill</br></br></br></br></br></br></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>G8 &quot;realistic&quot; at 50% x 2050 ???</strong></p><p>That Bush nixed an effort by the G8 members for agreeing a 50% cut by 2050 <br>
was sheer denialist circus -<br>
for that target was not remotely "realistic" as you suggest.</p><p>
In fact it was merely a random pair of numbers, chosen for their roundness,<br>
in total denial of scientific advice.</p><p>
Their adoption would have generated a CO2 concentration of way over 550ppmv,<br>
effectively garanteeing the feedback loops running the climate into a catastrophic instability.</p><p>
For the record, back in 1990, the IPCC advised that just to stop adding to the problem of excess airborne GHGs<br>
we will need to cut our global output of them by 60% to 80%.</p><p>
Until the day we have done so, we will continue to worsen the problem.</p><p>
So, apart from the photo-ops, what would be the point of agreeing a nonsense target,<br>
&nbsp;for more than four decades hence,<br>
&nbsp;with an utterly corrupt American regime ?</p><p>
Regards,</p><p>
Bill</br></br></br></br></br></br></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by Delay And Deny</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/bush-pushes-climate-meeting-shuns-solution/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 04 Aug 2007 04:08:45 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/bush-pushes-climate-meeting-shuns-solution/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Ride The Wave<p><br>
These cuts are reachable in a voluntary fashion by 2050.<p>
France has already cut its GHGs by going 80 nuclear.<p>
The Chevy Volt can get 150 mpg.<p>
And those are just the begining.<p>
Boeing announced a 40% efficient solar cell.<p>
New hydrogen storage technologies have been patented at an exponential rate in the past 3 years.

<p>John Bailo<br>
<a href="http://supratext.texeme.com" rel="nofollow">Supratext:</a></br></p></p></p></p></p></p></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Ride The Wave<p><br>
These cuts are reachable in a voluntary fashion by 2050.<p>
France has already cut its GHGs by going 80 nuclear.<p>
The Chevy Volt can get 150 mpg.<p>
And those are just the begining.<p>
Boeing announced a 40% efficient solar cell.<p>
New hydrogen storage technologies have been patented at an exponential rate in the past 3 years.

<p>John Bailo<br>
<a href="http://supratext.texeme.com" rel="nofollow">Supratext:</a></br></p></p></p></p></p></p></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>