[weaver]

My concern is for my envoronment and my children's children's environment. What I don't care for or have a concern for is the general media outcry over 'Global Warming'. Any and all expectations towards this serious issue are blow - way - out of proportion of reality. But this is what sells the news and the marketing/advertising budgets that feed news cycles.

What do you mean, Shane?

Airborne pollutants are a problem - no questions from me regarding this. Acid Rain. Smog. These are obvious and things we can - observe with our own eyes -. The United States has done wonders in the past 30 years to reduce the SO2 pollutants that cause Acid Rain (according to the EPA 2005, reducing Acid Rain pollutants and events by over 90% since 1972.).

Smog is still a problem and it will remain a problem until our cars pump out cleaner air and our industries do the same. But still, in the past 30 years air-borne particulate pollutants from cars have been reduced -40%- and industrial airborne particulate pollution by 85%.

The average car gets 30% better gas mileage then it did in the 1970's. Sadly, we have nearly double the amount of cars on the highway which results in higher C02 pollution.

But why don't I care?

No - realistic - plan of action is proposed by any 'green organization'. Any and all plans to drastically reduce pollutants in the modernized world would result in a serious depression in our economies, reduction of services, and a general and very serious loss of quality of life. I'm a selfish American. I like my air conditioning. I like refrigerated foods. I like my Honda Accord that gets about 30MPG. I have no interest in seeing these things go away. And they will go away, if we were to sign on to treaties like Kyoto.

Additionally, if we WERE to commit economic suicide and jump on the current plans, the impact would be negated by a ever growing and ever more polluting Malaysia, China, and India. With almost 50% of the worlds population in these 3 countries, less regulated industries, more concern with economic growth then industrial pollutants - they are well on their way of doing DOUBLE the pollution that all of Europe, Canada, Australia, and the US can do.

So - what do you suggest, Shane?

Let the market continue to drive to cleaner and more efficient processes with a little kick-in-the-pants from our governments. Our government can help drive the car companies to increase fuel economy, promote ethanol production (which is only a modicum of value to pollutants, but has a much larger political effect), push nuclear energy, push the use of more hybrid vehicle development. Push for more organic farming, push for more biogenetic farming that needs less fertilizers to grow. But in the end, its up to - us - to want to buy the cool Hybrid vehicle, to vote with our pocketbooks, etc.

Al Gore says we dump 70 million tons (140,000,000,000 pounds) of atmospheric pollutants every - day - . This is an incredibly high number.. right?

What are we dumping today?

Daily dump rate is equal to .0000012% of the atmospheric total. Say this another way, 12/10,000,000 is the daily fraction in contrast to the total atmospheric content. Still don't understand this number?

To dump as much content, at our current rate of dumping, into the atmosphere to reach - 1% of the total atmospheric concentration will take 8,334 days or 22 years.

Obvious Question: "But haven't we been dumping for hundreds of years? Or atleast since the industrial revolution started in the early 1800's? "
Obvious Answer: "Absolutely - but the rate of dumping 100 years ago when the population was 1/5 of what it is today was less then 1% of our rate of polution today."

Next obvious question: "Isn't our rate of polution increasing exponentially and we will fill our atmosphere faster with these pollutants?"
Next obvious answer: "Absolutely.. but now for the next set of important numbers. "

Of th