it's refreshing to see more and more threads like this in the Fragile Earth subforum, because the dangers of alledgedly well-meant interventions
against the recently created spectre of global warming are extreme, while the merits of some of these policies are questionable at best, while most of
them fall into the fraudulent and destructive category.
take the deforestation debate:
during the 1990s, everyone around the world, including ecologists were screaming from the top of their lungs it had to stop, today it's merely a
footnote to so called 'green' fuel ethanol.
how quickly they forget. at the same time, Malaysia and other countries are gobbled up by politically aided tycoons who use their power to turn the
land into a (to them) profitable biodiesel farm. this kind of product lends itself to industrial agriculture, becaue there are few if any quality
the net result is of course soil erosion (
for a warning example of the predictable outcome of industrialised agriculture) with all that entails.
the remedies prescribed by GW proponents are, by and large, worse than what they are designed to 'cure'. what could be worse than blowing SO2 into
the atmosphere? have people forgotten how hard people tried to get rid of
SO2 emissions in the 1980s to stop or at least reduce acid rain? SO2
+ water -> sulphuric acid how hard is that to understand?
next time they'll propose the use of nuclear weapons, probably. there's more of course:
there's no lunacy kinky enough to disqualify for GW topics, or so it seems.
a one last thread i'd like to add, about fuel ethanol and it minimal 'carbon benefits' for which we are willingly blowing food through the
using food for fuel is extremely despicable when you consider soil depletion, soil erosion and subsidized fuel driving food and gas prices at the same
time, thereby creating a triple
burden on consumers. the 'air tax' would be the fourth.
[edit on 28.5.2007 by Long Lance]