December 3, 2009
Full Show: December 3, 2009

bookmark    print    Email

Comments

2 comments

#2

Annie Petsonk says on that that “most people won’t support a tax on carbon”

But we know from British Columbia and from the poll that was just done in the US showing the opposite is true.

Al Gore, Jim Hansen, the Congressional Budget Office, the inventors of cap and trade, the economists who know the most about cap and trade, the EPA regulators with the most experience with cap and trade, Exxon Mobil, the American Public, and every witness that was asked the question in Congress all say that fee-and-dividend is superior.

In addition, fee-and-dividend provides a “double dividend”: it helps the economy and the environment. That’s what pretty much all the economic studies say.

Too bad this message isn’t getting out.

More info: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-kirsch/new-poll-shows-americans_b_377142.html

#1

Carbon off-sets, Carbon credits, and cap and trade are all feel good, do almost nothing schemes. Its advocacy points out the lack of understanding of the scope and the urgency of the problem by world leaders. The Copenhagen summit will fail because of this lack of understanding.

We must treat the root cause and not a symtom of the problem. We must abandon fossil fuels. The U.S. and the world have the technology and the resources to do this. The cost? This is not an issue since the savings in cash resulting from deploying a clean energy regime will be significantly greater than the the out lay in cash–Not counting the environmental benefits.

Renewables, wind and solar, will be a part of the solution, but Integral Fast Reators (IFRs) nulear power are indipensable to the U.S. and world’s energy and environmental problems. I believe Mr. Hanson would agree.

IFRs obviate the conscerns the pulic have about nuclear energy.

They use the waste from present reactors as fuel. In this sense they provide energy and get rid of huge storage problem. The residue remaining after the fuel is burned in an IFR only has to be stored 200-400 years instead of 100,000 years.

IFRs are designed proliferation resistant. Terrorists or rogue nations would have to be insane to even try using material from the IFR process to make a bomb.

A core melt down is impossible in an IFR. A Chernobyl or Three MIle Isand accident cannot occur in an IFR.

Radio activity emminating from an IFR is 180 times less than from a comparable coal plant.

The environment will not improve unless we get rid of the main cuprit of pollution–burning fossil fuels. It pains me to think of all those smart people in Copenhagen wasting their time on what at best will be a band-aid solution.

We must start NOW with a real solution. Time is running out.

Joe Shuster, Author
Beyond Fossil Fools
http://www.beyondfossilfools.com

FacebookTwitteriTunesYouTube

Produced by Creative News Group LLC     ©2014 WNET.ORG     All rights reserved

Distributed by American Public Television