(hello randoms who have added me + CLIMATE CHANGE FAIL.)

[tigger_01]

Hi, people!
Just noticed that a few people have added me in the past few weeks - if I haven't added you back it's because I didn't know you added me, and I don't know who you are! There's an entry on the top of my LJ (which normally says Friends Only, but doesn't because Photobucket is being lame) - could you please drop a comment saying hello and

Comments

[tigger_01]

(Warning - dw if all this makes sense, but I... tried.)

I can respect your opinion - you know what you are talking about and you are informed, which is more than I can say for many, many people.

I don't understand all of the science, and I certainly don't know which solutions are just easy for economies/businessmen and which may actually just increase their bank accounts.
IDK. I'm just frustrated that rich countries are unwilling to let go of their profits to change their consumption habits, poor countries are angry that they will be worst affected and they aren't getting any help so they aren't willing to do anything either - and even if it's not the most *pressing* problem, at the rate we are going it will become pressing by the time we take some positive steps.

Most importantly I think having this banner is forcing people and governments to become aware that their reckless consumption has effects that will come back to haunt them - and conservation and cleaner forms of energy can only be a good thing, right?

(What you say about people who stand to make $$$ off carbon trading schemes - the same can be said about oil/gas companies who push just as hard the other way. :D)

[roh_wyn]

It's true that oil and gas companies have a profit motive, but get, at least they're honest about it. ;)

Plus, the carbon offset trading creates no incentive for oil and gas to actually reduce emissions. As long as they can factor the cost of emissions into their usual budgets, they'll just keep on emitting. *shrugs*

[tigger_01]

(Not really. They buy up patents to alternative energy sources and they aren't so honest about that. :D)

[roh_wyn]

It's dishonest to buy a patent? Since when? It's a. Arms' length transaction between two entities, and the parties involved know exactly what they're buying and selling. And this too is donexwith their bottom lines in mind, and I think corporations are pretty honest about their primary responsibility being to their shareholders. (Corporations also do a lot of good on the world...and they couldn't do that if they didn't generate revenue as well).

If you ask me, there's a lot more dishonesty and ball-hiding from those who claim to have only noble environmental objectives in mind, but stand to get quite rich in the process. *shrugs*

[tigger_01]

I think it's dishonest to consumers who want an alternative way of generating energy but aren't able to access it/can't afford it, and blame the government/scientists.

I understand that their first objective is to raise revenue. But I also think corporations have social responsibilities - and that includes planning for the long term sustainability of humanity (which, obvs, ties into planning for the long term future of the company) - I don't think restricting access to other forms of energy is responsible at all, in that sense.

[roh_wyn]

I think it's dishonest to consumers who want an alternative way of generating energy but aren't able to access it/can't afford it, and blame the government/scientists.

Yes, but to the extent that it's government regulation that makes particular forms of energy accessible and/or affordable, that IS where the blame should lie. Patents are a limited resource. They're only valid for twenty years from the date they're filed, and most of the patents for things like harnessing wind power and nuclear power expired ages ago.

There's nothing preventing countries from adopting such technologies wholesale (and in fact, France and Japan both use significant amounts of nuclear power). But it's not that simple. If we all start driving electric cars tomorrow, where will we charge the batteries? How will we dispose of these batteries? How will we generate all the extra electricity we'll need to run our cars, since we're not going to burn coal or oil any more? If we go to nuclear power, is there an inexhaustible supply of fissile material in the world somewhere? What do we do with the spent fuel rods? Questions I'd love to have answered...and way before global warming! ;)

Conserving resources--and encouraging communities to adopt conservation--is a good thing, but focusing only on climate change (esp. when the science is far from "proven") is short-sighted. It makes much more sense to educate communities on the value of recycling, on using less petroleum per capita, on reducing particular contaminants in local ground water. That's money well spent, at least relative to billions of dollars spent on cap-and-trade and carbon offsets, which will just end up lining a different set of pockets.

Corporations do have social responsibilities, and a great many of them fulfill those responsibilities too.

Just my two cents.

[tigger_01]

Regulation and a lack of refinement of technologies are also the problem (and every technology has it's pitfalls - it's a matter of which one is worse), but oil and gas companies definitely don't make life easier for anyone.

I think this whole campaign about climate change is part of a broader push to understand our impact on the environment - but I think it's hard to really differentiate between water conservation/recycling/climate change, particularly as they all seem to be so linked, and are in the mind of the public.

Corporations do have social responsibilities, and a great many of them fulfill those responsibilities too
:D
And a whole lot of them do everything they can to not have to, as well. :(

[roh_wyn]

I'm not sure that's entirely true. It's to a corporation's advantagecto be a good citizen. It's why so many corporations fund non-profits and charitable causes. I think it's a fallacy that corporations go out of their way to dick over humanity. There are definitely some bad eggs out there, but I think generally, corporations do far more good than evil...even energy corporations.

I'm nit convinced that the climate change us about a broader agenda of environmentalism and conservation. In fact, the ficus seems quite narrow to me. It's all about carbon footprints now.

[roh_wyn]

Sorry abt all the typos, btw. I'm doing this from my phone, and the keypad's too small.