In response to:

Be a Patriot: Expand Your Carbon Footprint Today

Debora12 Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 8:53 AM
My folks are very anti-anything that smacks of energy conservation: outraged by animal protection legislation & water conservation measures, even when the lake behind their house dried up..I don't get it. They quote Genesis frequently. Yeah,- I get the argument that mankind was given "Dominion" over the earth and the creatures on it. But what about all the Biblical lessons on Stewardship? We have an obligation to protect our resources through legitimate conservation (not this hyped-up global climate change fiction, mind), pollution reduction, and sustainable policies. Do we really need all these plastic bags and packaging? Do we really need all of these convenience products? There's got to be a sane way to handle the issue.
Doug3370 Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 9:54 AM
The big issue is fossil fuel energy. If we can get to a mostly wind/solar/nuclear/hydro energy economy, the rest of the problems can be addressed at leisure, or just lived with.

If we press ahead with a burn-baby-burn coal economy, we spit in the face of the stewardship obligation. Whether there will be hell to pay in the afterlife I cannot say, but in this life, our descendants will be cursed with higher sea levels and a less favorable climate for farming and just enjoying life. So will those of us who are now young.
Fuzzy2 Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 10:17 AM
The next generation will be dead under your brilliant strategy Doug.
skywalker58 Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 9:43 AM
I was a Boy Scout and believe in protecting the environment and conservation of natural resources. That being said I also am an engineer and understand the law of diminishing returns. We should not dump mercury and raw chemicals into our streams and into the air; however, making smoke stack emissions oir auto emissions so clean you can breathe them is insane. We can spend a million to take out 90%, then ten million to take out the next 9%, then one hundred million to get the next 0.9%. What have you gained with that last 0.9%? Saving electricity by using mercury containing flourescent bulbs is stupid. Burning more than a gallon of gasoline to make a gallon of ethanol is stupid.
Rock Strongo Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 9:13 AM
Do we really need third parties pontificating from on high about what ostensibly free people do or do not "need?"
sfischer Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 9:10 AM
"Do we really need all of these convenience products?"
Put down your iPhone and walk away.

Conservation is a good thing and people do it when it makes sense. When it doesn't make sense, government mandates it. Take recycling for example. If you have to pay extra for your recycling service, it doesn't make sense and is an overall net loss for the economy and the environment. Those extra dollars that you pay represent resources that could be applied to other things. In order to generate those extra dollars, you have to work harder, longer. Those extra dollars for recycling pay for those extra diesel guzzling trucks to transport the waste. They pay for the sorting and processing facilities that all burn energy.
sfischer Wrote: Aug 06, 2012 9:12 AM
They pay for the salaries of the workers who use extra energy driving to and from the recycling facility. It is all government mandated inefficiencies that create and overall net drag on both the economy and the environment.

 

I'm proposing a bold conservation program to involve every state, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle. This effort will permit you to build conservation into your homes and your lives at a cost you can afford. I ask Congress to give me authority for mandatory conservation and for standby gasoline rationing. To further conserve energy, I'm proposing tonight an extra ten billion dollars over the next decade to strengthen our public transportation systems. And I'm asking you for your good and for your nation's security to take no unnecessary trips, to use carpools or public...