So, despite the plaintive cries of those who want Government to regulate every aspect of our lives, once again Big Business gets the message and acts first in it's own, and our collective, interest. If one lesson can learned from the history of government regulation, it's that it accomplishes the task in the most onerous, expensive, and least efficient manner. While the regulations administered by the EPA, for example, have done some good, mostly they have made a lot of lawyers very rich by dragging needed changes through the courts for decades, through the adversarial nature of the legislation itself. Put Congress in charge of legislating desired change, and no matter which party is in power, you will get favoritism, deal-making, and numbskull inflexibility. So here's hoping Speaker Pelosi sits on her hands and lets industry got on with it!

and that's not always a bad thing!

But sometimes it is!

Bio fuels for example, which Duke Energy plans on developing: there's not enough land in the world to grow corn, grass etc. to create ethanol or other fuels. In fact, growing just to create fuel-- takes significantly away from food supplies for people, as well as the huge monocultures destroy natural habitat for animals and plants.

You will see at least one 'nonprofit' website and ad campaign for 'clean' coal. The 'nonprofit' is created by a group of coal companies and their allies. Coal is not clean: burning one ton of coal creates four tons of carbon dioxide. Carbon Dioxide is the number one greenhouse gas pollution we can do something about. Don't expect these industries to tell you that fact, or any related information.  

once again Big Business gets the message and acts first in it's own, and our collective, interest. If one lesson can learned from the history of government regulation, it's that it accomplishes the task in the most onerous, expensive, and least efficient manner

It is difficult to imagine democracy without the reality of government regulations. Don't the people have the right to mandate legislation that reflects their values? Yes, they can vote with their dollars, but fortunately the real world has more depth than the market alone. We also have explicit law and public discourse about that law. And despite the forces that would misuse the trust we grant them we must seek to protect those things we value most deeply.

Nor should we forget that all political corruption goes hand in hand with big business corruption. Where, after all, is the wealth coming from that corrupts politicians? Can't we view political rhetoric and corruption almost as extensions of market rhetoric and corruption? And if we are going to talk about the inefficiency of government regulations we also have to consider all the many years that wealth and corporate interests have skewed public opinion and driven narrowly self-interested agendas. Is a war or two over oil a display of efficiency?

I for one am thankful for the political arena when it places pressure on the market - and I am thankful that democracy at least aspires to give popular sovereignty the power to apply this pressure.

You missed one - because they released this today, 2.2.07, when most eyes and ears are on IPCC.  But the nation's largest bank, Bank of America, announced it will extend its $5000 hybrid incentive program to all 185,000 employees.  That's in addition to their commitment to direct emissions reductions - and their building of the "greenest skyscraper in America."

The bank learned of the hybrid incentive from Timberland, which worked with Clean Air - Cool Planet, where I work, to develop their program.  The point is, action begets action in the business world - show me you can do it, and I'll try it.  So we hope, as more people (read: consumers) become aware of the dangers of global warming because of reports like the one today and sound media reporting, more companies will talk about the ways they are taking action to reduce emissions.  That will help make it less scary and more possible to do something about this global problem created by individuals.

Whether or not you believe governments are too slow to regulate environmental issues, whether or not you support the preliminary initiatives of some industries to develop "greener" practices, its useful to recognize government and industrial motivations are not always putting public interests first. This helps us all realize it makes sense to become as informed as we can from different sources. Government bureaucrats often seek re-election and companies will adapt to stay afloat. Their decisions can support their self-interest. What do you believe would be in your interest and global interests?

I agree!