Actually, I would rather leave coal where it is. It's a smelly nasty fuel
that emits even more radiation than nuclear plants. Bet you didn't know
that.
Yes, I think we should build more nuclear (or nukular, whatever floats your
boat,) and I just wish we could.
As for cars, I think working from home saves a lot more fuel, don't you
think?
You did not explain what you meant by "damage".
And you are right; your post was really worth 2% of a cent. :-)
Denys
_____
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Cc: Denys Beauchemin
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: I love global warming!
Better yet, I think we should spend the money on breaking down mountains of
coal rather than digging tunnels for safety reasons, and why build NukUler
energy plants when we can burn the coal we scrape off the mountains and for
that matter we do not need to build more fuel effective cars just build
bigger ones that we can all share a ride with.
What the heck we are only responsible for what amounts to 0.0006% of the
damage anyway.
my .02c
-------------- Original message from Denys Beauchemin
<[log in to unmask]>: --------------
> I see your point.
>
> It's a bit like the Kyoto stupidity that aims to force the signatories to
> reduce their emission of CO2 into the atmosphere to levels lower than
1990.
> It appears that signing the protocol makes you a good person, even if you
> have no intention of meeting your obligations. At this time, it seems the
> only country which has drastically reduced its CO2 emissions is the USA,
> which thankfully did not sign on to the farce in the first place. (But we
> do get blamed for every meteorological event.)
>
> I was checking recently into exactly what constitutes greenhouse gases,
what
> the effect of greenhouse gases is and how much CO2 is being emitted by
> humans and came
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
