[OT]Re: [oclug]Port 4662

[Shad Young]

On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 17:32, Jon Earle wrote:

> My point is not so much to do with "Stop Kyoto for it's all bad and evil",
> rather, "Don't rush into ratifying Kyoto until we have FACTS, not wishful
> thoughts, on paper in our hands".  I agree we should reduce emmissions.
> But, we should do it in meaningful ways, not ways which suggest a
> knee-jerk reaction to a problem.  Kyoto is going to cost more in jobs and
> money than it will save (we're only going back to 1990 levels after all!)
> 
> Cheers!
> Jon
> 

What I would like to see, Jon, is some strong evidence supporting your
statements. What precisely do you find "knee-jerk". What scientific
study demonstrates that economic recovery and wealth is impossible in
the long term?

What studies -are- showing is that the economic benefits may be more for
third world countries in the short term, so is your fear based on a loss
of your own personal wealth, or what is best for the *entire* planet?

Now, there are some camps who are against Kyoto because it does not go
far enough. Are you for scraping the accord to replace it with a far
stronger (and likely far more costly one) knowing that we may then loose
countries that are currently on-board?

What is your solution? If not this way, what way (recognizing that we
can not continue to study this problem as many feel it is already too
late, that action is required and required now)?

Shad

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Fortune should have the arbitrant of one-half of our actions, but she
leaves the other half, or a little less, to be governed by ourselves." 
- Machiavelli
----------------------------------------------------------------------