Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
You haven't heard about the multitude of business leaders who are concerned about climate change? Companies including Nike, Timberland, Levi Strauss, Sun Microsystems, and Starbucks? And you haven't heard of concepts like the triple bottom line?
If you think that dealing with climate change is only for tree-huggin' hippies, then you're dead wrong. A ton of agricultural products that we probably don't even give a second thought to can be affected by changes to rainy season timing, storms, and pest infestation where the crops are grown. That's just for starters.
@funnyguts > If you really want to cut climate change, write to your legislators.
That, and if your legislator is obviously not on board with action on climate change and energy reform, vote 'em out.
@Hatter > China, India and other industrializing countries will worry more about
feeding and employing their massive populations than about the pwetty
fwowers.
I wonder why China is now the world leader in solar energy tech. I also thought the United States used to be in said leader position.
@Hatter > Most of the places where those changes would have the biggest effect are already some of the worst places to live in the world.
That does not sound like a good argument for why they should be made more miserable.
That said, I don't think those of us in the United States have been having a great time either. Record-breaking snowfall this past winter, and now record-breaking tornado-spammin'.
Oh, did I mention that New York City has actually had to raise some of its water pumps because sea levels are actually rising?
"Okay, the Day After Tomorrow stuff you guys are pulling is making me sick."
IJBM: That people think a silly summer movie is used by climate change activists as a serious account of the effects of climate change. One: It's a joke among scientists. Two: 2012 was not made as a serious account of Armageddon. Then again, plenty of people think some political pundits are a better source of information than the people who actually dedicate their lives to studying climate change.
It also bugs me that this is a Point Refuted A Thousand Times.
100-foot waves inundating New York City are stupid as hell. Really fucking exciting, but stupid as hell.
Sometimes, Anvils do not need to be dropped.
Especially when my freedoms will be encroached on in the name of Enviromentalism.
"That sounds so Anvillicious it's making me sick."
You've mentioned getting sick twice now. Perhaps a trip to the hospital is in order. Hope you bought your insurance, rich boy.
Mine isn't supposed to be about that setting. I only needed to come up with a twenty-minutes-into-the-future setting that had lots of political instability. This was just a convenient way to achieve it using something vaguely realistic.
Because nature does not encroach on our freedoms at all?
(It's also where I got those company names from, in case you're wondering.)
I really would lament the loss of gasoline-powered cars. Electrics just don't compare.
@TheConductor: Well, I believe in freedom myself. The problem is that, as I realized while I debated the concept of freedom with Tnu1138, what freedom actually means in practice is not something that's set in stone. People would like to think so, and there are guiding principles that are useful, but the result is basically a bunch of judgement calls--just like everything else.
And just one tiny part of this is the idea of timing--freedom now or freedom later?
They charge no where near as fast as gas cars fill up.
At least for now, they are slow, and have much lower ranges.
Upheaving the massive gaoline infrastructure we have now and replacing it with electric stations is going to cost an absurd amount of money.
As you said, the energy isn't even from efficient sources.
Lolsubjective:
They're ugly
They're not as cool
They lack that awesome gas engine sound.
I....I see words, but they are filled with so much insanity that I cannot respond to them.
Is this what Europe has fallen to?! You'll take my freedom when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
And this is why we should be getting hybrids.
Tell me, bro, can you go buy a joint at the pot shop down the street?(no, you can't, since if you lived over here you'd still be underage b&, but the point still stands)
Anyhow, something as trivial as a specific type of car becoming obsolete isn't infringing on your freedoms at all. Most likely, you'd pay more taxes for it, but then it becomes a manner to flaunt your wealth ostentatiously, so all's good.
That said, it's an option we need to start setting up infrastructure for, at the very least for the consistently short-range inner-city stuff. But keep in mind that even with that done, rural zones will still need gas for a very long time.
The other thing is that the first place we should be attacking carbon emissions isn't transportation, it's the power grid (seriously, WTF is with all this coal). All shifting transportation from petrol to the power grid will do is make the power grid put out more emissions in its place.