No. You can thank Richard Nixon, with his price controls.
In 1971, the wellhead price was capped at $5. By 1974 the world price was
over $13. Those US wells remained shut until 1983, giving the Arabs and the
Commies a bonanza to exploit.
I already subscribe to the view that things such as energy efficiency and
'green' power generation from wind and tides (that decrease one's CO2 footprint)
make sense, simply from a practical 'common-sense' viewpoint. No argument there.
What annoys me is the *compulsion* that these zealots want to impose on us.
For example, I've always been a great fan of CFL lighting. I started using them
about 15 years ago and I now use them everywhere. Since laws have been proposed
to BAN incandescents - I feel very uncomfortable about where this is going. Not
least because GE and Philips are working on a new technology halogen
incandescent lamp that they believe will equal CFL for efficiency *and* produce
a superior qulaity of light. The 'greens' would have this valuable technical
advance consigned to the dustbin of history. Shades of Mao's 'Cultural
Revolution' and Big Brother methinks.
What do you mean, ...Still think they were faked?
Don't you remember the press conference NASA had where they said they
filmed the whole thing in a Nevada desert at night?
I sure do. Course, I also remember they said to keep the information from
some of the more stupid peo...ple
Er, never mind!
Global warming and global cooling have been around for as long as the
earth has been in existence. It goes through cycles of warm and cool.
The real question is whether we are in a situation of perpetual
warming heading toward disaster or whether this is just another
warming cycle that will be followed by cooling. I don't think anyone
really knows the answer to that.
As you mention below, a separate issue is whether mankind has actually
contributed signficantly to this current trend in warming or whether
our activities are coincidental with the global warmup that we are
clearly experiencing. I think the picture is again not clear. One
would be very alarmed if they looked at the significant retreat of the
tidal glaciers in glacier bay alaska if they ignored the timeline.
Indeed they have been retreating since 1790 with much of the reduction
ocurring before 1900.
Man has only been recording decent weather data _anywhere_ since the 1880s,
so I'd say the issue is far from settled. Remember "The Coming Ice Age"
(Scientific American, 1978)? For all we know it may be back in fashion
That's only one of several unsettled questions. Before I jump on the
Kyoto bandwagon I'd like to see open debate on at least these followup
1. How much harm will GW actually do if it happens? And how much good?
(For instance, I suspect places like Canada would become much more
comfortable to live in and have higher crop yields than now.)
2. Quantify how much it will alleviate that harm if we make the changes.
And how much it will cost, both in money and human lives.
(The EPA's CAFE rules now kill about 2200 people per year by forcing*
them into smaller cars where they're more likely to die in wrecks.
Anyone who still says the rules are a good thing ought to have to show
that the pollution they avoid saves MORE human lives. I doubt it.)
* Yes, when the government limits the supply of large vehicles or makes
them cost more it really is FORCING people out of them, even if the
bureaucrats leave it up to the market to conduct the resulting game of
3. In what cheaper ways might we either reverse the warming or alleviate
the harm? Hint: If it happens and is bad, it's almost certainly cheap
and easy to undo; see http://www.reason.com/9711/fe.benford.html .
Of course pollution is "real" and global warming is "real." The "real"
problem however is some want to make it a political problem, and it is not.
The debate is not whether there is pollution and global climate change, but
if it is indeed caused by man. Do a search of site that point to the
position of the sun and its activities, tectonic plate movements, historical
cyclical climate changes etc., then decide where you stand, WBMA
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.