Skip to comments.31 states target global warming
Posted on 05/09/2007 12:15:10 AM PDT by jdm
Led by California, 31 states representing more than 70% of the U.S. population announced Tuesday that they would measure and jointly track greenhouse gas emissions by major industries.
The newly formed Climate Registry is the latest example of states going further than the federal government in taking steps to combat global warming. State officials, along with some industrial groups and environmentalists, say the registry is a crucial precursor to both mandatory and market-based regulation of industrial gases that contribute to warming.
All agree that the most important part of the new registry is subjecting emissions statistics to third-party verification unlike a Bush administration program that does not require verification.
"You have to be able to count carbon pollution in order to cut carbon pollution," said Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
"The registry gives business and policymakers an essential accounting tool for tracking the success of the many emerging global warming emission reduction initiatives that are blossoming across the country."
The registry participants range from states that are moving aggressively to impose mandatory greenhouse gas reduction policies to others that are just beginning to examine whether to take even voluntary steps.
"This includes a lot of deeply conservative states who have signed on that we weren't expecting," said Nancy Whalen, spokeswoman for the California Climate Action Registry, the only current statewide emissions tracking system, which helped develop the multistate program.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Corporate socialism tightens its grip.
Again, the idea that conservatives (see social conservatives or Christians) are idiots.
Going to add a Climate Change section to FRhomepage.
“Borrowing” your picture....
Ever notice that it is only the Europeans and their admirers here in the US who push this “global warming” crap?
Of course this is only about measuring and tracking.
A level-headed discussion about climate change between those who tend to accept the evidence and those who are skeptics would lead a reasonable person to conclude that tracking and measuring was a good idea.
In the religious context of “believers” and “deniers” of course any information that might contradict the point of view is going to be controversial. Thus, the usual suspects will use the words stupid, wacko, or similar adjectives. The other side will call them heretics or similar adjectives.
For a reasonable person a subject like climate change would call for at least taking some small steps in the circumstances that human actions are the cause. It would seem that measuring and tracking is an appropriate and modest endeavor. Given the majority of states are involved and Americans are generally reasonable people, I am not surprised.
Because, of course, regardless of whether the current changes are anthropengenic or not, we should certainly be preparing for the consequences.
Judging by your comment and tag line, my guess is that you have absolutely no concept of history. Which probably means you are an American high-school social-studies teacher.
No Krautboy, just pointing out that we Americans are “different” from you people, a fact that will soon be true racially as well as culturally. I guess you haven’t heard of “American exceptionalism.”
Apparently not so different.
But, you certainly fulfilled my expectations immediately. No surprises from you.
This is gonna be fun.
Praytell what might a 'market based regulation' be?
You have Gore, Bush, and many more that is linked with the New World Order agenda also coming from the European counterparts with the RIIA.......which means the Global warming push....which is crap; is part of the agenda. This was set up in the Iron Mountain report of 1967.....[it is not a hoax as people say]
Yikes! Clemenza really surprised me on this thread. If you’re “Kraut Boy”, I guess I’m “Donut Boy”, but at least those are from somewhat healthy food groups -lol!
Sorry about that. He’s normally a really great guy.
I’m sure it’s nothing personal. Watching our country under the assault of socialists who require warning labels on shoe-strings so they don’t get hurt putting on their shoes wears a man down and leaves us pretty ornery.
Please don’t let this put you off. I’ve learned a lot from your insights on European affairs and I can’t stand to see any more of our European breathren driven out of the fold.
HEY! We don’t have much for ski slopes, so what the heck? I’m all FOR global warming. Crank it up!
No worries. I have had generally good exchanges with Clemenza in the past. My skin is thick like that of a well-roasted pig. Besides, Germans really do eat a lot of Kräuter. ;0)
We all wake up on the wrong side of the beg. Maybe he had a rough night sleeping with the fishes.
beg = bed.
I don’t believe anthropogenic global warming is possible when one considers Beer’s Law. The relationship between absorption and concentration is logarithmic. Even if CO2 were to double or quadruple, there would be no further increase in absorption of the wavelengths that CO2 can block. We are already maxed out.
Perhaps there is still some room left on the curve for other greenhouse gases, but not for CO2.
My understanding was that Beer's law was maxed out at 800ppm. We have a way to go first. But yes, you are correct, methane is actually a much scarier GHG.
I am not sure what “maxing out at 800” means. Does that mean that Beer’s law no longer applies at concentrations above 800 or that no more heat is possible to be retained at higher concentrations?
Even if the latter were correct. The amount of heat blocked between the difference of 380 and 800 ppm would be very small. That is the nature of the logarithmic relationship.
The sources that I have read say that the CO2 in the first 100 meters of the atmosphere is enough to block all the radiant wavelengths that CO2 can block.
One of the challenges of these discussions is agreeing on what data set to use. If neither side trusts the others’ data, it is hard to find common ground for discussion.
However, the mathematical relationship is undisputed and really there can be no significant effect of additional CO2.
At what concentration per million was there no further effect? Perhaps I am misunderstanding, and am no mathematician, but it seems that at 180 we get less heat retained than at 280. At what point does the addition of CO2 no longer mean anything?
so of these 31 states how many have Dem Govs.
In 10 years from now, this will be seen as the greatest mass hysteria, mass stupidity of the last 500 years.
Not surprising my Marxist governor, Granholm (communist-Michigan), would support this garbage. She’s currently trying to establish unelected soviet socialist councils to steal all the land, homes and businesses in the state.
31 Governors are ready to shut down all the coal-fired power plants in their states.
31 states to have no electricity to run cameras, newspapers, microphones and print news releases for the Governors.
31 Governors will no longer use chaffeurs and limos 5 times a day.
31 Governor mansions will be shut and the Governors will be forced to live in an ordinary 2,000 sq. foot house.
I am just sick of the Europeans seeing people with white skin and thinking "if they look like us, why don't they think like us?" If you want to see a new world society that thinks and acts like continentals, look to Argentina, not the U.S.
When Luigi Barzini said over 40 years ago that Americans are alone in the world, he was being prescient, albeit for the wrong reasons.
BTW: I apologize for using the K-word. I have visited western Germany and found most of the locals to be friendly, much more so than in France or Italy, btw. I just can't identify with the emphasis on consensus, collective over individual rights, and the rather pagan reverance for the environment that I find when I meet or correspond with the German-speaking world.
I will leave you with a quote from the American authour Henry Miller (born Gottlieb Mueller in Brooklyn), "Germans make the worst Germans, but the best Americans." ;-)