If the company gains a larger benefit from running at whatever capacity they need in order to meet market demands, the financial incentive is a moot point, unless the price of carbon credits becomes so cost ineffective that they are forced to scale back output, thereby paying financially in lost profits.
How's your free market looking now?
This is a myth perpetuated by the Gore crowd. Government already has every recourse against companies that are causing damage to the environment as a result of their operations.
The Gore crowd? People like me were learning about climate change before "An Inconvenient Truth" was a gleam in America's eye, and before it even became politically polarized. It's getting old and frankly it's just a tired bait tactic of those who lack real arguments. Argue facts with facts and cut out the ad homs, and maybe I'd be more willing to listen to what you have to say; because right now, I am growing rapidly disinterested.
But by all means, continue to marginalize modern science as "the Gore crowd".
Talk about marginalization, you completely ignored the actual point of my post and latched on to the "Gore crowd" comment like a rabid hyena.
I'll say it again. Government already has EVERY recourse against companies damaging the environment.
Carbon Credits are simply a feel-good bandaid that fails to actually address a perceived prblem.
Then don't make stupid, hyperbolic remarks that overshadow the rest of your post, and maybe you will not find yourself marginalized for said stupidity.
One of which is taxation. They can't simply shut down corporations because that is lost economy. They can provide negative incentives for companies to reduce pollution or switch to better measures. I'm not convinced it's fully effective but at least it's an effort, as opposed to doing nothing whatsoever. I'm personally in favor of steep fines and government alotted deadlines, but government is so reluctant to regulate business.
I don't think so. In Europe the carbon credit system is successful because the government actually uses the money to invest in environmentally-friendly projects and green energy developments. Like I said, it only produces results if the money is being allocated to the relevant causes. Carbon taxation works if there is a willingness to carry it out effectively.
Taxation is only one minor part of government recourse. Government already has the ability to levy heavy fines and imposed cleanup costs on any irresponsible companies causing damage to the environment.
Plants love carbon dioxide. Bring it on. If it causes global warming all the better. Growing seasons will be longer and we'll be able to grow food in places we never could before.
We could put a stop to anyone ever going hungry again. GW alarmists must hate people to want to put a stop to a good thing like that.
Please bring real sources to debates, wikipedia is not a source.
I'll pose the question to you too: How does the sale of carbon credits better the environment?
I'll wait while you think it over.
I don't believe man is capable of causing Global Warming. Consider me in rebellion from having it shoved down my throat all through the 90s. The Bible says the earth will be destroyed by fire, so maybe it's getting time for that to happen, but I know that when a country gets away from God, one of the first things it does is to start worshipping the creation rather than the Creator, and it looks like that is what might be going on. It just sounds to me like they are saying God's not in control and can't handle it, which I don't believe. Whatever's going on, He's got it under control. I also don't think it's right for teachers to traumatize 4th graders by telling them oil is going to be gone in 30 years or that no one will be able to go outside in 10 years because the sun will burn them through the Ozone (Which thank godness was a lie). You just don't do that, it's not your place and the children can't do anything about that. It's up to the parents to take care of stuff like that.
are you a creationist?
What are you denying? That Gore didn't keep a dime from his movie and Nobel Peace prize? That he's been involved in environmentalism since 1976? What don't you believe?
Oh, I'm not denying that he is professing to be a die hard environmentalist. Are you claiming that he has no vested stake in ensuring that this GW frenzy keeps rolling as long as possible?
Deuce, Thank you for explaining that, I appreciate it.I've always heard this about pollution and carbon dioxide and saving the planet by recycling and Ozone and sunburns and staying inside and no more oil, but I couldn't make logical sense of it, but you explained it very well so at least it makes actual physical sense now. I still don't know if it's true or not, but now I have a little better idea of the scientists' view.
You make it sound like he's solely in it for the money. I don't think it to be the case, even though I am sure he's profited from it. You're okay with capitalism, aren't you?
Are you okay with Ponzi schemes or Nigerian email scammers? :2razz:
You're entitled to your opinion and I apologize for not clarifying mine. I'm sure that deep down Al Gore may believe he is the savior of the world, but too much of what he says just reeks of snake oil. I'm prefectly okay with the concept of capitalism, but not so much with what I see as conning the uninformed into giving up their money.
Not a very good analogy as there are obvious benefits to reducing fossil fuel consumption even if you completely disbelieve the science behind AGW.
Sure there are, however, this should be dictated by the free market, not the government.
If we allow the free market to change of its own accord, we're going to end up replacing foreign oil with foreign solar panels and wind turbines, because we'll be way behind the curve when it comes to technology and market share. Most other industrialized nations, and even China and India, are ramping up renewables faster than we are. They see the writing on the wall, but our short-sighted individualist mentality is slowing us down here.
Cap and trade is a way to get the free market to work on emissions reductions through competition. It gives a financial advantage to companies that can be more efficient, emissions-wise. Striving for that competitive edge, businesses will do the job that needs doing. If you call that "dictating," well, then I guess it's dictating. It's in our long-term best interests. We should be the ones building and exporting the best solar panels, wind turbines, and advanced batteries in the world, not buying them from China and Japan!
edit: There are still people who proclaim the earth isn't actually getting warmer. Those people are pants-on-head crazy.
I agree. There are a few here.
Are you okay with Ponzi schemes or Nigerian email scammers? :2razz:
You're entitled to your opinion and I apologize for not clarifying mine. I'm sure that deep down Al Gore may believe he is the savior of the world, but too much of what he says just reeks of snake oil. I'm prefectly okay with the concept of capitalism, but not so much with what I see as conning the uninformed into giving up their money.
Great contribution to the debate, Middle. :roll: Are you ever going to answer my questions at any point? :2razz:
Great contribution to the debate, Middle. :roll: Are you ever going to answer my questions at any point? :2razz:
Hahahahha... sorry, I was a minute late. :2razz:
It's amazing to me how much hatred Gore instigates. He is certainly not without critique, but a lot of it as been rabid/unfounded lies and exaggerations.The deniers certainly love to use him as fodder.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?