Skye Posted December 3, 2006 Posted December 3, 2006 Here's an interesting interview with Bjorn Lomborg: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=112806D He argues that the risks of climate change have been taken out of proportion. He also argues that the amount of money spent combating it so far has been large but ineffective, so consequently we should look at easier problems to tackle. I tend to agree, I think that many environmental problems have common causes, but certainly things like land clearing have a direct and immediate impact on the environment that climate change will struggle to match. What are your thoughts?
ecoli Posted December 3, 2006 Posted December 3, 2006 I agree in part. I think that economically, focusing on issues such as developing alternative energy (esp. wind and solar) will help fight climate change in the long run, but will also help solve our energy problems.
jackson33 Posted December 3, 2006 Posted December 3, 2006 Here's an interesting interview with Bjorn Lomborg: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=112806D He argues that the risks of climate change have been taken out of proportion. He also argues that the amount of money spent combating it so far has been large but ineffective, so consequently we should look at easier problems to tackle. I tend to agree, I think that many environmental problems have common causes, but certainly things like land clearing have a direct and immediate impact on the environment that climate change will struggle to match. What are your thoughts? certainly climate change, in the reference of global warming, has been out of control. much money that has been spent as well. the easier problems are being addressed and have been long before "Greenpeace" or any other extreme group addressed them. some major ones as well. as to cleaning the ground of waste material or contaminated properties or closing off old mine sites and such, i might suggest this is a good thing. as much as possible the makers of such things pay the price. the most costly per square foot project i know of is the grounds the Twin Towers set on. some old chemical and metal mine sites as well have been cleaned and new projects built on the property. in short its not in the end that costly. the origin of many projects was for the health and/or safety of near by residents and this needs to be considered. even picking up after your dog, has some medical ramifications.
herpguy Posted December 13, 2006 Posted December 13, 2006 I agree in part. I think that economically, focusing on issues such as developing alternative energy (esp. wind and solar) will help fight climate change in the long run, but will also help solve our energy problems. I agree with ecoli. Focusing on creating new technologies would creat jobs and, with hybrid cars for example, provide cheaper ways of using energy.
weknowthewor Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 How about using biogas as a source of energy?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now