When the first and often only objective is “In God We Tru$t”, great suffering and extinction will follow. The 1/10 of 1% along with the 1% have an insatiable appetite, and they just don’t care. Uhp, except of course perhaps when they go to church on Sunday, but even then.
“especially towards solving major challenges.”
I’m sorry, but this is the first sign of sanity that I’ve seen in years.
They used to hide their deference to honesty. Now lying and untruth are every day, open policy. That’s right, they are too wealthy to care.
“Political will led to the Montreal Protocol and the banning of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs), they noted.“
That’s not really accurate a all. Sure laws were passed, but it was significantly easier to pass laws in the first place dealing with the ozone issue.
For the Ozone:
- Limited products contained CFCs, and HCFCs.
- Only a few developed countries used products with CFCs, and HCFCs at scale
- There already existed substitutes at commercial scale that did not contain CFCs and HCFCs
This is not even remotely similar to GHGs and the climate crisis
- Nearly every major industry on earth emits GHGs
- Nearly every country on earth emits GHGs
- In most industries commercial scale substitutes largely don’t exist if they exist at all.
To compare these two events illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the events that led to the Montreal Protocol and the reality of our existing society today.
Additionally, if you want to ban fossil fuels entirely then you need to come up with substitutes for all the product that this source produces. That includes the millions of petrochemicals that are produced for the industry, which so far ZERO political plans even address.
Carbon label every product.
Oh I forgot grow Hemp,it reverses the greenhouse effect.
Carbon dioxide is about 80% of emissions from burning fossil fuels. Capturing carbon dioxide in its way up the smokestack and using it as fracking fluid
would store it underground out of everyone’s way.
So add labels to literally every product ever made that currently exists for the entire world?
What is foreseeable benefit?
On a much smaller scale, even even lying in bed sleeping and breathing emits carbon dioxide. You don’t want to ban fossil fuel entirely, only the burning of fossil fuel. It might be worthwhile for the federal government to finance some manufacture and use of equipment word capture and store carbon dioxide. Mother nature does it with green plants ranging in size from common green pond scum to huge sequoias.
I seriously doubt that any industry profits more from the Trump administration’s loosening of environmental protections than the U.S. fossil fuel industry, which greatly contributes to global warming thus stronger hurricanes and a drier, more fire-susceptible climate. With the unprecedented U.S. Westcoast wildfires and off-the-chart poor-air advisories, I wonder how many fossil fuel industry CEOs and/or their young families may also be caught in harm’s way. Assuming that the CEOs are not sufficiently foolish to believe their descendants will somehow always evade the health repercussions related to their industry’s environmentally reckless decisions, I wonder whether the profit objective of a CEO’s job-description nature is somehow irresistible to him or her?
Can anyone recall the allegory of the fox stung by the instinct-abiding scorpion while ferrying it across the river, leaving both to drown?