To: average joe who wrote (85831 ) 8/20/2000 12:51:46 PM From: cosmicforce Read Replies (3) | Respond to I don't have any problem with most of your facts but they are irrelevant: you've changed the topic several times. The topic was greenhouse effects and that it wasn't conservative to keep dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere while there is a major climatic change in progress. You seem to be "siding" with someone - the producer. I don't "blame" them - it's the economics of the system that have to be adjusted. The producers, like me, are in a giant economic system based upon expected benefits and costs. That's about it. They are just in the game. Like me. The game favors my continued consumption right now. That is bad.If oil is subsidized (it is) and other options are not (they aren't), then you never get off the oil jones until a crisis occurs. Everyone knows that market inefficiencies exist and in a complicated system of subsidy and indirect subsidy, you get more (burning of oil) when you have a subsidy.current average consumption of a North American resident times the current number of people on the planet (World Bank: 8000 kg/oil/person * 6 Billion people) that's 48 billion metric tons of oil. And both are increasing. This has to stop - the waste heat alone from that would cook the planet, let alone its highly doubtful sustainability.
