RE: Motivations behind Passionate Discourse on Climate Change? - Comment - OmniNerd

Allow me to quote myself at length as to why this tends to divide into a left/right issue:

Already there are lawsuits against those who have “caused” global warming. The UN, EU, and politicians like Gore are rubbing their hands together at the thought of imposing “carbon” taxes and greater governmental intrusion in all our lives. Mouth breathing celebrities preach to us common folk to repent of our energy sins whilst hopping into their SUVs to take them and their entourage to their private jets, or while having a hot tub helicoptered in. The Live Earth concert produced as much carbon in one day as Afghanistan did all last year. Much touted “green” fuel such as ethanol are ultimately worthless, as there isn’t enough farmland to grow enough corn to make it worthwhile, plus it pollutes worse than gasoline. Don’t get me started on the costs of bio-diesel.

Aside from the fact that probably the simplest and cheapest way of reducing pollutants is increased nuclear power (even the co-founder of Greenpeace says their no-nukes absolutism in the 70’s was wrong-headed and environmentally destructive) and a really good, affordable, powerful electric car, I have not heard one idea being proposed about what we should do if Global Warming is inevitable. Not one. No ideas on how to adapt, on how to make Global Warming work for us. Just hysteria and polishing up the stone slabs in anticipation of making human (or orangutan) sacrifices to appease the angry weather gods.

Tanzania says no to international project on carbon capture, storage - Carbon Offsets Daily

Tanzania has rejected an international project to capture and store carbon from the air in a bid to mitigate the effects of climate change and global warming.

Under the project, fossil fuel emissions are captured in the form of carbon from large point sources like and power stations and permanently stored away from the atmosphere.

Speaking at a stakeholders meeting at in Dar es Salaam yesterday, deputy director of Environment in the Vice-President’s Office, Mr Richard Muyungi, said Tanzania refused to take the project because consequences of storing carbon are unknown.

Climate Progress » Blog Archive » Signs of the Apocalypse, Part 11: Couple pays $155,000 to clone dog

They won’t be cloning many dogs in 2100 if we stay on or near our current emissions path (although we may well have cloned some of the 40% to 70% of species the IPCC says will be extinct by then so I suppose this technology will have some value, ironically).

Indeed, I doubt they will cloning pets in 2050 and maybe even 2030. Humanity will be in all likelihood be in “Planetary Purgatory” by then — knowing with a fierce certainty the consequences we face but also fearing we’ve probably waited too late — since, by the end of the 2020s, the world will be much warmer and will have been hit by multiple near-term climate Pearl Harbors.