Do not mix issues KosmiKoyote..
I have seen some great ideas on here, but I have to agree with cd3rd on this point.
Many ideas presented here are very expensive and require huge government subsidies to implement. Yet other worthy ideas that are far cheaper get sidelined because of politics.
Stick a green label on something expensive and there is public outrage from the green community because it is not implemented without question. Offer a cost effective alternative that does 90 percent of the performance for 80 percent of the cost and you are suddenly called a global warming naysayer.
It stinks when good, cost effective science that has a proven ROI losses credibility with the public when the cost effective benefits of cleaning up the environment are over shadowed by the jaw jacking of people pushing an agenda like global warming.
You may be surprised to hear that majorities of people support initiatives to cleanup the environment. Myself being one such person.
I would rather hear of solid science being used to address a long proven problem like pollution feeding high asthmas rates than tainting good scientific work by needlessly using a hot button topic to support it.
A great example is the growing use of coal in Chinas power plants. People franticly yell about cleaning up the CO2 from them to slow global warming while ignoring the proven science that those same plants pump out tons of mercury and lead emissions every day.
An easier and less controversial argument could get the Chinese to clean up the planets now with proven cost effective technology to address the mercury and coal emissions. Technology which, by the way, would slightly reduce the CO2 output at the same time.
But because they cannot get the CO2 they ignore the rest of the poison. An ignorant and shortsighted strategy all in the name of an agenda.
