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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (63701)	5/6/2008 11:18:50 AM
From: Bridge Player	Respond to of 543059

I should have pointed out that the link that said "China's carbon dioxide emissions may exceed those of the United States in 2007, " was from a report in March 2007. As was the part that said that Australia hadn't signed.

To: Sam who wrote (63701)	5/6/2008 11:23:19 AM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543059

These "arguments" remind of the declarations back in the 80s that AIDs was God's punishment for gay sex in the sense that the people making the arguments somehow convinced themselves that a virus was quid pro quo for "immoral" behavior, lol. Really very relevant to a discussion of climate change and emission reduction. Not.

To: Sam who wrote (63701)	5/7/2008 5:12:06 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 543059

U.S. Carbon Emissions Fell 1.3% in 2006 By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, May 24, 2007; Page A14 U.S. carbon dioxide emissions dropped slightly last year even as the economy grew, according to an initial estimate released yesterday by the Energy Information Administration... washingtonpost.com Thats an absolute reduction not a reduction in intensity. And even before that reduction growth in CO2 emissions had slowed. The problem is not that American CO2 emissions are skyrocketing. Rising energy prices are getting our emissions under control. The big increase is from the developing countries (particularly China) But we are also importing the emissions through the climate And push more costs on America's energy use, that other nations don't get and we will "import" even more emissions, as the energy intensive activities (other than transportation) move elsewhere. In 2050, global average macro-economic costs for mitigation towards stabilisation between 710 and 445ppm CO2-eq are between a 1% gain and 5.5% decrease of global GDP. This corresponds to slowing average annual global GDP growth by less than 0.12 percentage points. In addition to the very large level of doubt about this cost estimate, a world wide reduction of global growth by .12% for decades on end is quite expensive. A 5.5% decrease in global gross production. Depending on exactly how you measure global gross production its something like $40tril to $70tril. 5.5% of that is trillions of dollars.