[color:blue]Why should "we" be responsible for developing such a way?</font color=blue> - Well I cannot say for sure about China but I know here we are forced to install special scrubbing filters in all smoke stacks - these filters are very expensive around 100,000 each and have to be cleaned or replaced constantly.<br><br>Sooooo when EPA came a knocking many plants just shut down. Example we had a recycling steel plant that shredded cars, melted them and made foundation re-bar that went into concrete. Their estimated cost for 2 filters and retrofitting 2 smoke stacks was close to 600,000 and the estimated "yearly maintenance" cleaning and changing filters was close to 1,000,000 per year ----> It was cheaper to buy the re-bar from China and PAY for the shipping and you would still be cheaper then having the re-bar made 10 miles away locally<br><br>Are we getting the real world or do I need to give more examples??<br><br>[color:blue]Well, "we" have the money and the technology and the scientific infrastructure to do so,</font color=blue><br><br>scientific infrastructure - It was them who came up with a 100,000 filter<br><br>Technology - Well not here yet maybe some day? so long its not another 100,000 dollar filter<br><br>Money ?? whos money us, them, ours ?? I don't know<br>The companies that can absorb the filter cost, will simply pass that cost down to the consumers - The companies that cannot will either outsource to China or similar or simply just shut down<br><br>Now I don't wanna hear any crap about the US NOT doing enough,, sure the scientific infrastructure can do better but its not only about finding cheap arse labor either. In the whole just doing business in the US is incredibly expensive compare to emerging countries because the don't have a EPA on their arse<br><br>
#368926 - 06/25/0807:34 PMRe: For those who actually care...
This is starting to sound like a Monty Python skit. :-) <br><br>When I was a kid we were also very poor and lived across from the smelly Taunton River. When we ran out of oil it got so cold that the water pipes froze and we couldn't flush the toilet. We used to boil water on the electric stove, when the electricity wasn't shut off, and pour it into the toilet bowl to try to thaw it out so that we could flush it. <br><br>We also used to boil water on the kitchen stove and pour it into the bathtub so that we could take a bath in warm water. When there was no oil, there was no hot water. Everyone in the family had to use the same bath water, so we would fight over who would go first. <br><br>I wonder if that makes my carbon footprint smaller? <br><br>
It's never "too late" if "too late" means that action no longer matters and laziness/ignorance becomes harmless.<br><br>Worst case: things are bad and going to get worse no matter what. (Probably true.) I sure as heck want to do my part to control how MUCH worse! And I surely want as many others to do so as possible. If it's a choice between 15% of people changing their habits and 20%, I want the 20%!<br><br>nagr[color:red]o</font color=red>mme<br><br>I require stroyent!<br>TeamMacOSX.com | MacClan.net
As Carp has pointed out, the issues are complex, though the temptation is to look only at blindingly simple solutions because that's what we understand on a visceral level. People DO die of the heat, particularly those who live in old fashioned hotbox apartments with no cross-ventilation and not located near a nice cool lake. Do we give them a free pass, but allow others, perhaps the aged, to die because they can not tolerate as much heat as younger people? How do we evaluate these sorts of things?<br><br>Speaking for myself, I believe I can do better. I also believe I have already done better (all my house lights are fluorescents, except for the appliance bulbs.) But do I have to give up the two or three weeks a year I run the air conditioning? When I put in central air, my electricity bill dropped because the new unit was a lot more efficient than the two window units I used to have. Doesn't that count for something? The car I drive has 6 cylinders, true. But would it serve the cause if I bought a new four banger? New cars cost energy to manufacture. Besides, My nasty six is fourteen years old and has 75,000 kilometers (about 50,000 miles) on it, so I use less gasoline than that boastful fellow with a hybrid down the street.<br><br>I also use less electricity than I did a couple of years ago because when my wife died I no longer had to pay the cost of running an oxygen generator 24 hours a day. I'm not going to ask whether we should abandon the seriously ill because that would be a rather fatuous question.<br><br>The fact is, we live in the modern world. The only way we could go back to using the amount of energy we did a couple of hundred years ago and producing as little pollution as a citizen of the third world today would be if we were willing to accept that standard of living and the consequent shorter lifespan. Our best hope is that we improve the efficiency of what we do now, but, like it or not, we are (I believe) already past the point of no return. If we, as a species, do manage to pull it off and save the Earth, it certainly will not be due to finger pointing and blame finding, but to a sudden (not very human) realization that individual responsibility is what is desperately needed.<br><br>[color:blue]Laz, OFI[/i]<br></font color=blue>[color:green]<br>Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.<br>
Loc: Hampstead, MD, USA
Well said. You shouldn't feel guilty about running your air conditioner, or driving your car - you simply should evaluate yourself and see what little changes you can make. Many of those changes are painless, and will have a positive financial impact for you.<br><br>As you say, it's a modern world, and we won't - and shouldn't - go back to the dark ages. Unfortunately as popular as all the "green" talk is, ultimately people don't realize the climate will ultimately do what it wants to do. Yes, we certainly have our impact, but we're also constantly improving those things we use that do impact it. We're along for the ride, rocking the boat as we go. The earth will be here a billion years after man has died out.<br><br>If anyone here were really serious about doing their part, they'd dump those power sucking macs and build a linux machine with one of these:<br><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NCPuaUIN8wA&hl=en&rel=0"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NCPuaUIN8wA&hl=en&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br><br>Apple needs to get on the ball. :P<br><br><br>Hey I'm an F'n Jerk!®
Hey I'm an F'n Jerk!® twitter.com/SgtBaxter facebook.com/Bryan.Eckert
"But you still have to make the taxies and to run them."<br><br>True, but it's a number of people using the same vehicle, rather than each person having their own vehicle.<br><br>When I lived in a city I would hire a car if I really needed one, as it worked out cheaper to do that a few times a year than to buy and tax and insure and mend one - and it was also more ecological, as I was just sharing the use of one fairly new vehicle that's fairly clean to run. Now that I'm miles from the nearest anything, I need a vehicle. On Friday I'll rent a bike and find out whether I can cycle or not (my knees were too knackered last time I tried) but otherwise it's 45 minutes cross-fields walk to the nearest bus stop, which won't be doable in winter. I was planning to move to a village with a bus service, but got gypped by the landlord at the last minute and ended up where I am instead. So I drive and regret it.<br><br>- padmavyuha<br><br>[color:purple]A lopsided man runs best along the little side-hills of success<br>- Frank Moore Colby</font color=purple><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by padmavyuha on 06/26/08 00:43 AM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
_________________________ If it's brokenless, don't suffix it...
Oh, and I was reading a New Scientist article a few months ago a report that claimed that divorce is bad for the environment because it usually results in the two parties getting their own places, each with their own white goods etc. This is of course nonsense - what's bad for the environment is not divorce, but the number of people in the developed world who choose to live on their own rather than sharing houses or living communally. Currently living on my own in a cottage in Somerset, I'm licking my wounds and recovering from a bad marriage breakup (and checking out who I am when no-one else is around to tell me, after 8 years in Buddhist communities and 2 years of marrriage), but I've always been happier living with other people, and intend to again soon. More economical, more ecological, more challenging but more fun. People in the UK are finding it harder and harder to find accommodation in cities because everyone wants to live on their own and that just fills up a lot more buildings. And each person's got their own fridge, freezer, microwave, phones, TV, DVD, etc. etc.<br><br>- padmavyuha<br><br>[color:purple]A lopsided man runs best along the little side-hills of success<br>- Frank Moore Colby</font color=purple>
_________________________ If it's brokenless, don't suffix it...
Thanks John very well said;<br><br>But lets not forget that "Mother Nature" herself spews out SO2 levels in the form of volcano eruptions and other calamities that we "puny" humans could ever produce - Sure we are adding to the pollution but compared to mother nature we are nothing in the contribution !<br><br>
Fair enough Steve, but remember, the system was delicately in balance before we started throwing garbage into it. We might not be adding as much or as many toxins to it as Ma Nature does naturally (though I couldn't debate that; I'm no expert) but there can be little doubt that at the very least we are adding the straw that broke the camel's back. And, by this time we are certain that whatever amount we are adding, it IS affecting climate. And Man is too stupid to understand the ultimate repercussions of that.<br><br>[color:blue]Laz, OFI[/i]<br></font color=blue>[color:green]<br>Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.<br>
John,<br><br>The fact you are conscious of the issues and don't live a "wasteful" lifestyle is a huge leap in the right direction.<br><br>MANY folks live an excessive lifestyle and their wealth allows them to ignore the frailty of the environment. Those are the people whose bad habits will be next to impossible to change. It's the middle class who may have the greatest positive impact on the environment. Those who are near, at or below the poverty line cannot be blamed for not taking grand steps in saving the planet. Heck, they're the ones who suffer most when the cost of living rises. It's hard to say they should head out and spend money on comparatively expensive CFLs.<br><br>The biggest part of the population can have the largest impact and should! Even the smallest efforts can have healthy effects.<br><br>- a.k.a. Mississauga -
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.