Bush and the environment

[ralphwiggum 6]

well, here's a new look at the issue. WWJD?

CNN article

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

'Jesus,' government eye SUVs

RALEIGH, N.C. (CNN) - Church and state are getting involved in the gas-guzzling SUV debate.

A coalition of religious and environmental groups is launching a "What Would Jesus Drive?" campaign Wednesday, hoping to get people to switch to more fuel-efficient cars.

The move comes as the Bush administration reportedly considers a proposal to increase fuel efficiency standards for SUVs and light trucks. According to the Wall Street Journal, the proposal, currently at an early draft stage, is likely to draw intense opposition from car manufacturers.

The religious and environmental campaign is likely to draw more immediate attention, however. The group plans a news conference Wednesday in Detroit. Members hope to meet with the Big Three automakers and the United Auto Workers union. Car buyers in four states will soon hear an advertised appeal to their environmental conscience: "What would Jesus drive?''

It's a joint effort of the National Council of Churches and the Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life. The group is planning television advertising in North Carolina, Iowa, Indiana and Missouri to urge consumers to park their sport/utility vehicles -- claiming that Jesus would prefer a cleaner vehicle.

Meanwhile, top regulatory officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are considering a proposal to increase fuel efficiency standards by half a mile per gallon a year, starting in 2005. The overall increase would add up to 1.5 miles a gallon by 2007, according to the Journal.

Bush administration officials, contending with foreign oil dependency issues, are believed to be somewhat sympathetic to the proposal, although industry concerns about the new standards may sway the final requirement.<span id='postcolor'>

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 20 2002,19:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Who is destroying a country... stop turning this into a huge crisis just as soon as your town or province is hit economically.   <span id='postcolor'>

Quite possibly the most ignorant thing that I've read in my life. *still shaking head in disbelief*

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USMC Sniper @ Nov. 20 2002,03:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Dayglow: Canada is ABSOLUTELY NOT larger than Russia!!!    I cannot believe people make these mistakes, I mean, my friggin' Grade 6 teacher thought it was! I get agitated because I am of Polish and Russian descent, but still by looking at an atlas you should immediately tell which country is larger!

Russia is NOT a developing country, seriously how old are you, people in my class know better than you! (Thanks to me they do, I love acting all smart in front of a bunch of imbeciles who think Hitler is still Chancellor of Germany! I'm not referring to everyone in my class, just a few.)<span id='postcolor'>

Bwahahaaaaah, this forum sure is funny.

Can't believe what kinda stuff i sometimes read here

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Nov. 21 2002,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 20 2002,19:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Who is destroying a country... stop turning this into a huge crisis just as soon as your town or province is hit economically. <span id='postcolor'>

Quite possibly the most ignorant thing that I've read in my life. *still shaking head in disbelief*<span id='postcolor'>

Spoken like a true capitalistic materialistic... you finish it.

OR

What? ok... Othin doesn't know what economic problems I'v had to deal with during my life, so I guess an ignorant reply like that is expected.

EDIT: I'm getting tired of getting insulted on this forum, just remember, when you start getting into insults it means you are ready to give up on logic...

[dayglow 2]

lol, do really think my comment about a socialistic pipe dream and his ignorant comment were attacks on your person? You need to develop a tad thicker skin. He wasn't stating that you are a moron, just that he thinks the comment was ignorant. I see a big difference there. Same for me. My personal ideals clash with yours and I stated as much. I believe that a region should carry it's own weight, but that doesn't mean you drag it back down to every one elses level through penities.

I'm not against protecting the environment and having cleaner emmisions. I just don't think Kyoto is realistic and well implimtated. Alberta already has tougher standards in the works, but they are more gradual than the agreement to give the technology time to develope and the economic sector to include them into their model.

As for Chretien..he IS a moron and one of the worst things to happen to our country. Nothing but prolific spending and bad choices abound his government. He only thinks of himself and the Kyoto agreement is his chance to grandstand on the international stage, damn the country in the process.

Another tidbit of how wonky this government is: The Calgary  Philharmonic Orchestra has gone bankrupt and will no longer exists past this year because it can't secure funding, yet some guy gets federal funding to ejaculate into vials and carry them around with him or another to hang dead cats from a tree and have them decompose. Guess that's 'art' and the orchestra isn't. I mean there is something seriously messed up with our government.

COLINMAN

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DayGlow @ Nov. 21 2002,14:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">lol, do really think my comment about a socialistic pipe dream and his ignorant comment were attacks on your person? You need to develop a tad thicker skin. He wasn't stating that you are a moron, just that he thinks the comment was ignorant. I see a big difference there. Same for me.<span id='postcolor'>

I disagree, his message was clearly a personal insult, as yours could have been. Actually it's not only about this particular thread and you two... so don't worry.

I have too much patience with alot of people here, I'm considering thinning it a little if anything.

(problem is I meant what I said in that comment, and I'm not going to apologise for it, environment is more important)

[Akira 0]

Clearly the trees are the problem...

Damn Trees!

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 21 2002,11:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Nov. 21 2002,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 20 2002,19:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Who is destroying a country... stop turning this into a huge crisis just as soon as your town or province is hit economically.   <span id='postcolor'>

Quite possibly the most ignorant thing that I've read in my life.  *still shaking head in disbelief*<span id='postcolor'>

Spoken like a true capitalistic materialistic... you finish it.

OR

What?  ok...  Othin doesn't know what economic problems I'v had to deal with during my life, so I guess an ignorant reply like that is expected.

EDIT: I'm getting tired of getting insulted on this forum, just remember, when you start getting into insults it means you are ready to give up on logic...<span id='postcolor'>

Number one this was not a "personal insult" as you put it. This was an observation of your statement, which I still believe to have been said in ignorance.

For people who live in industrialized modern countries like the United States and Canada, an economic hit IS a huge crisis. I doubt that anyone is going to be altruistic enough to to just shrug off being fired and cheerily try to figure out a whole new career and how to take care of their families. I don't know what economic problems you've been through, and honestly it has no effect on this conversation. Just because something happened to you, dosen't mean it should happen to everyone else in North America.

I absolutely agree with you that something needs to be done now rather then later to bring North American industry in line with the rest of the worlds goals. But the Kyoto agreement would be too much too soon. It would be an outright shock to the respective economies of both Canada and the United States. Who is going to finance that? Certainly not the industrial sector, they'd be in too much disarray, so it would fall onto the taxpayers...

I think that some sort of agreement should be reached that would put North America on a slightly longer (but more expensive) curve to bring it online with the Kyoto agreement.

[PitViper 0]

people have been duped into thinking that the environment is constantly getting worst. In fact, it has been improving. There's no point to sounding like a dooms-day fool.

[Balschoiw 0]

Pit seriously you really should get some info on pollution.

The effects of pollution dont show instantly. The effects take decades to show. By now the ozon hole is getting so big, cause of exhausts of the 70´s. Get my idea ? Everything we do to the planet now will slap back multiple at our kids.

It may be cool to say, "Nahh my garden is still green, so where is pollution", but if you check illnesses like Asthma or Neurological illnesses you will find out that a dramatic amount of children suffers from them from day of birth nowadays. This is not normal and not to explain by evolution theories, but it is a direct effect of poisons that are in air, water, food. I want to have children someday but I really doubt that they will be able to have the same life as I had when I grew up. You dont believe ? Check Australia and think !

[MesserJockel 0]

thats exactly the point... these damages show up very slowly, and even if there are temporarily improvements, noone can be sure about the outcome. two things which make environment politics quite difficult are

1. nothing you do today will show tomorrow, especially not within an election period

2. people have quite a lowlwvwl interest in things they dont feel right now.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 22 2002,09:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pit seriously you really should get some info on pollution.

The effects of pollution dont show instantly. The effects take decades to show. By now the ozon hole is getting so big, cause of exhausts of the 70´s. Get my idea ?<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,64518,00.html

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ Nov. 22 2002,17<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 22 2002,09:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pit seriously you really should get some info on pollution.

The effects of pollution dont show instantly. The effects take decades to show. By now the ozon hole is getting so big, cause of exhausts of the 70´s. Get my idea ?<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/10_23_99/note2ref.htm<span id='postcolor'>

there was a CNN article about the O3 layer becoming split. but it doesn't mean that it's permanently shrinking. also, could it be that continuous environmental actions is the reason why it's getting smaller?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/today/oct3a.html

The diminished area of ozone depletion is due to unusual stratospheric weather patterns and does not necessarily indicate a long-term trend, the researchers explain.<span id='postcolor'>

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,64518,00.html

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Aerosols and other chemicals are blamed for the thinning, and treaties banning those ingredients are expected to help the layer recover over time.

<snip>

An Australian study published two weeks ago reported that chlorine-based chemical levels in the atmosphere are falling, and the hole in the ozone layer should close within 50 years. Although the ozone layer has not yet begun to repair itself, the hole would probably start closing within five years, said Paul Fraser, of the Australian government-funded Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, or CSIRO

<span id='postcolor'>

so at the current rate of chemicals falling(by us using less chemicals) it should be closed in 50 years.

[PitViper 0]

http://www.amazon.com/exec....=507846

[PitViper 0]

Ralph, I fully support feasible environmental regulations that are not draconian in the manner that Kyoto is.  A environmental friendly chemical was developed to replace those that contained CFC's.  This will eventually restore the ozone layer to its proper level.

I was merely pointing at that balshoi made up the "enlarging ozone hole" in his head or he was deliberately lying.

[Balschoiw 0]

I only need to take the car and drive on hour to see big forests that are actually dead cause of sour rain. I repeat myself when I say that the personal attitude of people "consuming" environment and natural ressources has to be changed. It is fact that oceans get polluted to much and we have that poisons in seafood. What will be a problem in the nearer future also is that drinking water will get more expensive and more hard to provide as the water levels sink cause of agricultural reasons. The carbon concentration within natural water goes up steadily by fertilizers used heavily in agriculture. It is not only one hot spot we have when it cames to pollution. The "earth system" is very touchy and we see that there are to many adjustments made by mankind. Noone can estimate that longterm harm but there are indicators that show that something is definately not right with the planet.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 22 2002,11:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I only need to take the car and drive on hour to see big forests that are actually dead cause of sour rain. I repeat myself when I say that the personal attitude of people "consuming" environment and natural ressources has to be changed.<span id='postcolor'>

What do you recommend? everyone go back to subsistence farming?

[Balschoiw 0]

My point is that we need to switch our general attitude towards the planet we live on and come from to allow the generations after us to have it in the same state as we liked it to be. We owe this to our children. There is no sense in raping the planet and destroying it intentionally. If we have knowledge that things do harm the environment we should use this knowledge to prevent further harming and heal the things we are able to. Otherwise this planet will spit us out and we have to live under a bowl with artificial air, cause the planet will no longer provide the things we need for our daily living.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ Nov. 22 2002,17:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ralph, I fully support feasible environmental regulations that are not draconian in the manner that Kyoto is.  A environmental friendly chemical was developed to replace those that contained CFC's.  This will eventually restore the ozone layer to its proper level.

I was merely pointing at that balshoi made up the "enlarging ozone hole" in his head or he was deliberately lying.<span id='postcolor'>

yes, i agree on substituting with environmentally free chemicals.

however, just becuase O3 layers are shrinking right now, doesn't mean that it's gonna be like that for rest of the time. if we spend too much non-environmental-friendly products, we will have problem again.

[foxer 0]

I agree cars/SUVs should get better MPG,They probably could do it now if they really want too.But you people want change to quickly.How can you do research and developed with no money ? There would be none if everyone loses their jobs.I don't know the whole story about the kyoto treaty thing.But i would like to understand it more.Anyone unbiased ?

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Nov. 22 2002,14:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree cars/SUVs should get better MPG,They probably could do it now if they really want too.But you people want change to quickly.How can you do research and developed with no money ? There would be none if everyone loses their jobs.I don't know the whole story about the kyoto treaty thing.But i would like to understand it more.Anyone unbiased ?<span id='postcolor'>

Don't try to wiggle out of this, SUV's , minivans, pickups should be heavily taxed, that would talk some sense into people who only care about money... no more SUB (typo, I mean SUV) for me, house payment is more important.

No matter how much research you do, the larger the vehicle the more fuel it will use, and in this case waste.

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 22 2002,21:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">6--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Nov. 22 2002,146)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree cars/SUVs should get better MPG,They probably could do it now if they really want too.But you people want change to quickly.How can you do research and developed with no money ? There would be none if everyone loses their jobs.I don't know the whole story about the kyoto treaty thing.But i would like to understand it more.Anyone unbiased ?<span id='postcolor'>

Don't try to wiggle out of this, SUV's , minivans, pickups should be heavily taxed, that would talk some sense into people who only care about money... no more SUB (typo, I mean SUV) for me, house payment is more important.  

No matter how much research you do, the larger the vehicle the more fuel it will use, and in this case waste.<span id='postcolor'>

It's not the people fault that they like to travel in something big.Have you seen how americans drive ? It freaking scary.I do believe though if companies want to make a better MPG car/suv ,they could do it.But for some reason won't,or the cost would be to extreme for the normal middle-class person.

I think people whining about pollution and global warming is a hypocrite.Only people in this world that can bitch about the global warming and pollution is africans.

I agree we have to do something,but what ? Outta work people won't help matters.Because that would take money away from R&D(research and develope).THe only way i see us getting anywhere is if they made some type of battery,that would stay charge for very long time,and can haul lots of ass.

[ralphwiggum 6]

if you haven't noticed, minivans thesedays get great MPG. i think Toyota Sienna has at least 15-22(if not 18-25)miles per gallon.

the problem lies with suburbians driving big ass SUVs like Ford Expedition(now going away) and Chevy Suburban, which are hard ot park as well.

[bn880 5]

Here are a few mpg's for you (watch the Toyotas, they are a good indicator):

1999 Ford Excursion 4x4, 6.8 litre V10 engine, approximately 11mpg (28L/100km)

GM Suburban 255 cu in V8, 14.5 mpg in the city and about 15.5 mpg on the highway.

2002 Toyota Highlander, 3L V6 DOHC 220HP, 13.0 l/100 km (22 mpg) city and 9.7 l/100 km (29 mpg) highway.

2002 Toyota Camry, 2.4L I4 or 3.0L V6, 9.8l/6.5l 24mpg/36.2mpg (4 manual) (city/highway litres/100 km)10.1/6.9 23.3mpg/34mpg(4 AT) 11.6/7.7 20.2mpg/30.5mpg(V6 AT)

2002 Toyota Prius, 1.4 I4 Gas (actually auto gas) Electric Hybrid, 52 MPG city and 45 MPG highway;

Chrysler Concorde LXi - 3.6L V6, City: 12.8 L/100 km (22.1 mpg) Hwy: 8.3 L/100 km (34.0 mpg)

Subaru's

Forester GT Man wagon 4dr 11L 21.4mpg city / 7.4L 31.8mpg hwy

Forester GX Auto wagon 4dr 9.5L 24.7mpg city / 7.6L 30.9mpg hwy

Outback GX Auto wagon 4dr 10L 23.5mpg city / 8L 29.4mpg hwy

And yes, minivans are getting pretty good on fuel consumption, but should still be avoided if not needed.

[bn880 5]

Interesting and viable articles on Canada/Kyoto

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/campaig....201.asp

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/climate_change/kyoto/default.asp