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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (346947)	8/15/2007 9:53:46 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575267

cj, For the US, reforestation can be a big win. There already are times of the year where the CO2 content of the atmosphere drops as the air moves over the continent. It wouldn't take a whole lot to make North America carbon negative over the whole year. I love the idea of reforestation. In addition to the function of the forrests as CO2 sinks, the reforestation can be an economic plus, overall, because I figure that the timber revenues would exceed grazing revenues. And in addition to the increased revenues, forrests support more wildlife, and they can be good places for people to go to, to relax, hike, camp etc. They also help erosion and hold more moisture. BTW, there was a lot of snickering on the AMD thread when AMD and Dell jointly announced initiative to plant trees. I think it is a great idea. More importantly, we fight global terrorism in the best possible way, we cut off their air supply. But, I suppose that makes too much sense. On that front, I think going to nuclear power and eventually solar as it gets cheaper and easier to deploy. First, to replace oil and gas for electricity generation (eventually for heating too), later for powering cars. I think the real win will be when cars move to all electric, the GM concept (Volt car, I believe). These hybrids are really not a huge gain. It just makes some people feel good about themselves (which is all that counts for some people), but that's like a baby step that just diverts attention away from leaps that can be taken with nuclear and solar electricity generation. Joe

To: combjelly who wrote (346947)	8/16/2007 1:54:51 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575267

CJ, > Tench, didn't you stop using the argument "well, everyone else does it" when you were like 12? The point is that we can't tell the 2B citizens of China and India to maintain their current living standards while we wring our hands over "global warming" but won't make any sacrifices to our own living standards. For example, I guarantee you that carpooling will save more energy than getting a Prius, if you count not just gas. "When you ride alone, you ride with Bin Laden." But most Americans don't want to be inconvenienced that way. Kind of sad to see like 3/4 of all cars on California highways with only one passanger. > Not necessarily to reduce global warming, but because the primitive technologies they are using now pollute so badly that it kills people. That to me is a separate issue. Soot and smog are bad. Beijing really has a lot of cleaning up to do before next summer's Olympics. But CO2? Come on. Tenchusatsu