Something's afoot in our planet. It's right in front of our eyes. Whether one agrees or disagrees with global warming theories, one should see something's changing. Moreover, we know that dumping waste into our environment isn't cool. Although it is a consequence of production, it has to bear a cost.
What many didn't get, as Reuters shows, is that the consumer doesn't need to pay higher bills to contribute to tackling pollution. The notion of consumers agreeing to an increase in energy cost to subsidize industry implementation of pollution-reducing measures is short sighted and fallacious at its roots.
Ever heard of efficiency? Consumers need to focus on REDUCING their energy costs by using energy more wisely. Reduced energy consumption would mean the companies will have to alter their production patterns. Coupled with an elementary carbon emissions market, reduction in production and investment in anti-pollution measures would result in a breakeven for the energy producing companies, who would decrease production and emission and sell the emission rights to those who need them.
An excellent editorial in this month's The Chemical Engineer argues for efficiently far better than I can. I'll try to gain permission to reproduce it.
It is also very amusing to see how China, one of the countries that transforms our planet into a garbage tip, is now blaming global warming for its water shortages. Right, after you've burned enough coal and dumped enough filth into your own air to make smog clouds commonplace you suddenly realize you might have done something wrong. If Communism doesn't make you richer, it certainly dumbs you down and chokes you. When East Germany wanted to compete with used cars from the West it introduced the Trabant, which came to be called the forest-killer in some circles. Guess why.
Improve your environment: Reduce your bills and fight Communism.
No comments:
Post a Comment