Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (100723)	2/16/2005 10:21:24 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 793698

The subject we were discussing was global warming, not smog. Smog is by definition part of the problem. Global warming accellerates smog formation. Carbon dioxide and other air pollution that is collecting in the atmosphere like a thickening blanket, trapping the sun's heat and causing the planet to warm up. Coal-burning power plants are the largest U.S. source of carbon dioxide pollution -- they produce 2.5 billion tons every year. Automobiles, the second largest source, create nearly 1.5 billion tons of CO2 annually. ... air pollution in the United States continues to cause 30,000 premature deaths and several million lost workdays nationwide every year due to asthma and other respiratory ailments. Scientists say these losses will be increasingly compounded by global warming, which accelerates smog formation and increases the risks of fatal heat stress. what impact you are expecting from global warming. It is a serious question. If you cannot identify the product of global warming, how do you know it will be a bad thing? You cannot know. Smog is what we can now see. It has immediate impact, But global warming has even more dire consequences for the longer term: # Melting glaciers, early snowmelt and severe droughts will cause more dramatic water shortages in the American West. # Rising sea levels will lead to coastal flooding on the Eastern seaboard, in Florida, and in other areas, such as the Gulf of Mexico. # Forests, farms and cities will face troublesome new pests and more mosquito-borne diseases. # Disruption of habitats such as coral reefs and alpine meadows could drive many plant and animal species to extinction. But, I am like most people. I am not too concerned about the longer term. The question remains, is the best that we can come up with solid enough to be actionable? To what end do we take action? And at what cost? At the very least we have to describe the objective before we move heaven and earth to to after it. I'm no expert, but aggressively cutting down on pollution, using energy more efficiently, and not doing unnecessary harm to our natural resources seem so obvious. I don't have the necessary skills to quantify the actions to be taken, but I know the solution exists and the numbers are there to support my common sense.