I noticed a couple radicals freaked out when I suggested we leave the solutions to pollution problems to future generations. On the surface (without any critical thought) it figures the cretins would go nuts when they read it. But if you actually THINK about it, it makes perfect sense. In 1966 or so, some of the first pollution devices came into being on cars. CO2 filters. But, it wasn't until 1976 that catalytic converters came into being. It wasn't until then that time that any real progress was made on auto emissions. The converter made it possible to extract about 90% of the "harmful" gasses from car exhausts. Until that time, all other measures (EGR, CO2 cannisters, etc) made little difference. The same is true now of pollution we can't yet control. Whatever half-assed measure we come up with will only have a modest control effect. However, implementing strict controls will have a devastating effect on our economic systems. Because they aren't cures, like the catalytic converter was, but axe-like cuts, that make little headway in controlling emissions but do serious damage to the economy. In turn, this damage reduces drastically the amount of money available for development of real pollution controls so in the long run, wasting time, money and effort on modest controls may prevent us from finding REAL controls. Science is not cheap, and R&D gets cut when people and businesses suffer financially. So, lets stop pretending 15% cuts over 10 years will "save" the environment, (especially since the rapidly industrializiing Third World is doing F--- all to help) stop implementing WORTHLESS attempts at pollution control that will only hurt us in the long run but KEEP spending on the science needed to produce TRUE controls at a future date.
-Rich