Washington task force releases climate change report
Thursday, December 4, 2008 8:18 AM PST
By PHUONG LE
Associated Press Writer
Printable version
E-mail this articleSEATTLE — A task force created by Gov. Chris Gregoire has released final recommendations on how to curb climate change in Washington state.
The final report of the Climate Action Team calls for more energy-efficient buildings, compact urban development, better collection of recycled materials, using tolls to reduce driving and revising development rules to account for greenhouse gas emissions.
The team has been working since last year to find ways to help the state reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and even further by 2050.
The report released this week outlines two dozen recommendations, but doesn’t say how state agencies plan to carry them out. That plan dealing with specifics is expected in two weeks.
Because the state faces a $5.1 billion budget shortfall, state agencies were given more time to figure out how to carry out the strategies, state Ecology Department spokesman David Workman said Wednesday.
Increased levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are most responsible for triggering global climate change, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
To reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other gases, the advisory team looked at four areas, including energy-efficient buildings, transportation, waste and environmental review rules.
To encourage more energy-efficient buildings, the report recommends giving public utility tax credits to commercial buildings that meet specific levels of energy efficiency and requiring public buildings to post how much energy they use.
Climate change should be considered when state and local governments do environmental reviews on projects, the report said.
And the state should find new revenue sources to encourage more transit choices, and consider more tolls as one way to get motorists to change their driving habits.
The team included lawmakers, government officials and business people.
Old Charlie wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:04 AM:
" A 5.1 billion budget shortfall and the state is wasting money on this nonsense, in addition to effectively crippling the economy..... disgusting! "
dogshead wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:29 AM:
" Old Charlie-yeah, I agree. Let's ignore our best scientific data and continue to live like our actions have no enviromental impact. Polute and overpopulate, that's my motto. Like you, I could care less about the world we leave our children. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:31 AM:
" They had to have a task force to figure this out? I'll bet these were among the 200,000 our Liberal gov told us she created during the campaign. Boy, she is very good. We are so lucky to have her. "
cynic954 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:38 AM:
" The climate has been changing ever since the planet was formed. It regularly goes through cycles. The last period of warming started 12,000 years ago when the last ice age came to an end. "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:46 AM:
" So just to clarify OC and TDNBB, we should not work on a plan to eliminate waste and environmental degradation? I would be willing to guarantee that those initiatives will result in far more jobs for regional contractors than your precious pipeline. But since the "liberal puppetmaster" has her name in the article it must be stupid, eh? Green jobs are our way out of economic recession, creating a strategy that allows the state to create the opportunity for such jobs is the first step in realizing those gains. To ignore that fertile sector is foolish and shortsighted. "
IN MY OPINION wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:05 AM:
" it hasn't worked so far. The other day it was really cold and rainy, now it is warm and sunny. We'll have to get another task force. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:15 AM:
" Or Dogshead we can waste money today on the obvious so that today's children and families do not get the services they need like healthcare that our great Liberal gov promised NOT to cut but did. All of this is so obvious it is unbelievably fundamental. So please put away your sarcasm and deal with the reality that we have a $5 billion (possibly 6 or 7 before our Liberal gov asks for a tax increase) state deficit that today, right now, is far more crucial. "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:29 AM:
" Green building and transportation initiatives will provide a virtually untapped industry for any local contractors and manufacturers that jump on the bandwagon. These opportunities will remain viable for several decades if not longer. The net result being widespread economic revitalization. Incidentally, both parties supported initiatives such as these in the recent election cycle. Since the "liberal puppetmasters" name is in this article our neocon commentators feel as though they have to belittle the policy. However, this sort of initiative will result in far more employemnt opportunities in far more areas than your precious pipeline. So what is it that you stand for, besides unimaginative and overly stubborn conservatism? "
Viewpoint wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:30 AM:
" TDN BB- Sounds like you find the taskforce report credible. Gregoire could probably have saved us all money by issuing the same conclusions herself, but if the words had fallen from her lips would you have believed her? LOL "
Common Sense 24 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:30 AM:
" Do yourself a favor. Google search for US Temperature record extremes and then tell me how anyone can believe the global warming BS. Keep drinking the kool-aid. "
ItsKarma wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:35 AM:
" Green is big business.
Building, developing, restructuring etc...
Imagine all of the family wage jobs we could create!!
Creating a bigger stronger tax base, reducing crime, paying for better schools and medical care...What are all of these tree huggers thinking??? "
Building, developing, restructuring etc...
Imagine all of the family wage jobs we could create!!
Creating a bigger stronger tax base, reducing crime, paying for better schools and medical care...What are all of these tree huggers thinking??? "
country gal wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:46 AM:
" Yep, I do believe they are among the 200,000 jobs she created. Just what we need, more state and federal jobs to burden us taxpayers with. This is going to be an interesting trying time. "
petunia wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:52 AM:
" It's called "it's gonna happen anyway". But our dear gov has found another way to spend money the state doesn't have. Way to go gov. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 11:04 AM:
" Viewpoint, I don't find the report credible, I find it elementary. This is all government action. She didn't need the task force or to tell me about it. She needed to simply do it. I think anyone who questions why this task force was necessary is right. Are you telling me the information in this report is not something that our brilliant governor didn't already know? In that case you are admitting she isn't so brilliant afterall. Because I bet I could go to any middle school and find bright -- not brilliant -- students who could have come to the same conclusions. I guess the light bulb is just coming on for our brilliant gov. How many other ways will she find to waste taxpayer dollars? Oh that's right she's in Philadelphia kissing the ring of the new Messiah. How much did we spend on that wasted trip for her entourage? "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 11:29 AM:
" Sorry about the double post, thought the first didn't submit properly. Those with state and federal jobs also pay taxes and use the money that they earn at those jobs to support their family, so maybe those positions shouldn't be demonized quite to the extent that they are. As for "it's gonna happen anyway," it will not until it is economically viable. A small company will not invest in green building because it costs more to construct. Tax breaks will make it a viable option in a tough economy. Unfortunately, American industry has shown a general reluctance to join the green bandwagon and needs a stimulus. The simple fact is joining the Green Revolution is an excellent way to revitalize America's failing manufacturing sectors, and create more R&D and tech jobs. Also, you might have missed this part of the article, but the "puppetmaster" has instructed the responsible agencies to find more cost effective measures for implementing these programs in today's recessionary economy. Thus, the Gov is aware of the economy and obviously does not want to continue spending money the state doesn't have. Even if there were a small expenditure getting this program started, it would be well worth it, purely for the potential employment impacts and impacts to the state economy in the long-term. As for the "kool-aid" comment, remember you head-in-the-sand types are in the minority now, so if anyone is comparable to Jonestown, it's you. "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 11:33 AM:
" TDNBB: You read the report? Why don't you let us know what is so elementary about it? Do you do economic feasibility studies in your spare time? "
DW wrote on Dec 4, 2008 12:56 PM:
" O.K. here I go shouting from the mountain tops again. MAN IS NOT CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING!!! Or any other type of climate change. How long are we going to let this type of hysteria scare people into tinker toy cars, lights bulbs with mercury in them, cap and trade of CO2, and using energy sources that are very expensive to produce. It is mind boggling that people actually believe we are ruining the planet. At the same I want clean air, clean water, and a dose of common sense in our government. If we really wanted a clean source of cheap energy, we should be building nuclear power plants by the dozens, reprocessing the spent fuel and stop with the idiocy of ethanol in our gasoline instead of growing corn for out bellies. The earf has warmed and cooled for millions of year without man ever having stepped out of a Chevy Silverado. Please people, you don't want the Al Gore's of the world to convince people that driving a pop can for a vehicle and cap and trade of CO2 is going to do anything but waste trillions of dollars on needless technology. If anything, the planet is going through a cooling period right now. Stop with the idiocy!!! "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 1:21 PM:
" DeeDub: Clearly you are well informed on anti-environmental talking points. Are you also aware that many of those climate shifts were brought about by massive CO2 and particulate emmissions from natural sources like volcanic activities? Unfortunately, current co2 emmissions are a result of rapid industrialization without knowledge of the effects. There simply have not been any Mt. Vesuvius style eruptions that would cause this. In short, I agree, stop the idiocy, do your homework, or at least read publications from those that have! Additionally, the trillions of dollars that would be "wasted" would be wasted in the American economy if we begin to seriously think about green initiatives now. What a waste, combating rising unemployment and the economic doldrums throughout the country, sounds terrible. "
Common Sense 24 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 1:31 PM:
" My kool-aid comment is in reference to the idea of the Earth getting warmer due to pollution. Clearly you don't research for yourself and just accept what you are fed. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 4, 2008 2:16 PM:
" Cowlitz1, what is new here? NOTHING. This is stuff that has been said over and over. And I am not debating whether climate change is happening. My point is that everything in this report is basic, very basic stuff. Climate change consideration on new projects. Tax credit for new buildings, etc. These are old ideas, not new ones. That is the point most people are trying to make here. We didn't need to waste the time or the money to do this. We needed leadership at the top but we have a Liberal governor who doesn't lead. This was a waste of time and money when we don't have money to waste. Don't you get that point? "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 3:20 PM:
" CS 24: You're right I do not have the academic coursework or fiscal resources behind me to conduct my own research. I'm glad that you do, in the meantime I'll continue to base my opinion off of accredited scientific articles, I apologize. You are right though, there is a debate within the scientific community in regard to what extent humans have contributed to the problem. I simply find the majority view more compelling. TDNBB: These may be old ideas but they have not been enacted at a state level, simply talking about them does not result in economic benefit as the state does not have the power to fiat compliance. What does need to be developed is a way to incorporate these old ideas into tomorrow's building strategies, the best way to do that is to provide economic benifit to businesses, thereby making the policy attractive. We are at that point now. I would not support government action that has not been throughly vetted, this is the vetting process. The potential windfall for contractors and manufacturers involved in environmentally conscious building and manufacturing processes as a result of this policy is phenomenal. That is why incorporating these old ideas into state policy is benificial. The report isn't asking its readers to look at the climate issue, green building, tax credits, etc. as new ideas, but as ideas that could combat climate change while benifitting the state economically. I can think of several local companies that would benifit from this. "
country gal wrote on Dec 4, 2008 3:40 PM:
" Cowlitz1: You were saying that those with state and federal jobs also pays taxes. You are aware it still taxpayers money that's paying their taxes. "
skeezix wrote on Dec 4, 2008 3:53 PM:
" country gal, Try to look at it this way...true, your tax dollars fund state and federal jobs. When the state and federal workers pay taxes it is from their wages (recognizably, funded by your tax dollars). However, when the person at the grocery store pays his or her taxes, it is from their wages which are funded by the dollars you spend in that store. The point is this, everytime you pay something, whether taxes, bills, etc., you are contributing to the funds that pay the wages of the people of that business or government department. Does that make sense? Either way, you are contributing to the wages of others, whether through taxes or not. "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:07 PM:
" Wake up people! Who cares about global warming, we are entering a depression larger than your grandfathers great depression of 1929. using money on going green, or improving our roads is just wasting our valuable Dollars. What little amount of resources we now have need to be used to increase our exports, bringing new money into our system, not just recycling money through government projects. We now have a 12% unemployment rate(this includes the people who have stopped looking for jobs, this is the number the government does not want you to see), and this number probably will increase to 20%. The USA is broke, and soon will be bankrupt when the credit rating agencies downgrade U.S. treasuries from our AAA rating. When China and the rest of the world start selling our dollar will you still be willing to spend more money buying an electric car, or just trying to survive? We have to stop ALL unnecessary spending now!! "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:34 PM:
" Did anybody read the second paragraph?"using tolls to reduce driving and revising development rules to account for greenhouse gas emissions."- So now the State wants to create toll roads, this will just be another tax! We pay taxes to the Government to build the roads, then the Government wants to tax us for using them, not to help pay for them, but to reduce the amount of miles we drive!- I just do not get it!! Maybe Gregoire should stop driving around in her caravan and take the bus! It is time to stop the spending and start reducing the size of Government! "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:38 PM:
" My point is there is nothing to export, we no longer have a viable industrial or manufacturing base. Switching to a green economy will revitalize these sectors and provide a means of lowering the unemployment rate. You need to produce something to export it. Right now we could export... well, service workers, that's about it. Good call Skeezix! "
country gal wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:40 PM:
" The person that work at the grocery store get paid by the business owners that hires them. The business owners pay their wages. Big difference "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:56 PM:
" Cowlitz1- Please do a little research! During the great depression, and more recently the recession in japan, when government tries spending their way out of financial trouble by spending money and creating jobs improving infrastructure, it prolongs the crisis. Japan still has stagflation, after fifteen years of trying to spend their way out of recession. You just do not get it, spending increases our debt, higher debt means higher interest rates, and this means slower growth. Government projects at this time is the last thing you want to do, if you want a quick recovery! "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 5:12 PM:
" Cowlitz1- I do agree with you on our lack of exports, but what nation is willing to buy our green exports when the price of oil is $42 a barrel and dropping? What consumer is willing to buy a green car when gas is under $2 a gallon? But we do have aircraft, plastics, nuclear and agriculture exports we can increase. I do not have all the answers, but who every does will reap the rewards. I wish Obama would come out and say he would lower capitol gains taxes, I think that would help encourage investment into producing goods we could export! "
dude wrote on Dec 4, 2008 5:28 PM:
" what are all these green jobs that are going to pump billons into our ecomony? name one. "
American First wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:04 PM:
" In addition to kalama river resident, it also means higher taxes which compounds the problem. Government is the problem, NOT the solution. This whole task force and the pending consequence it will have is a disaster in the making. It will only succeed in harming our ability to compete globally and will eliminate freedom and liberty. They are already proposing tolls which is a tax, to force us peasants to stay home. It's all a bad idea, based on propaganda! We now have windmills all over the place which destroy the landscape, and worse are unreasonably expensive for what they produce. What's worse is people are actually believing this BS. A "green" economy is a depressed economy! "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:12 PM:
" Construction of alternative energy fuel stations, processing plants, associated infrastructure, including the ubiquitous mini-mart, Design and development of new technology, structures and components that meets the criteria set forth in the report, construction of additions or new facilities that incorporate those designed elements. These are all areas in which growth and employment opportunities could occur. Our community has already been provided jobs (albeit temporary) through regional windfarm projects. All of those jobs will have spillover to regional retail sales, which will, in turn, impact transportation jobs and numerous other jobs down the line. The only government expenditure would be compiling and legislating the criteria for establishing these controls, and enforcement/management costs. The US has the opportunity to take the lead right now and dominate the international green industry. Like it or not, it will grow, it will be marketable (it already is, look how many packages describe the carbon footprint of the product they contain) and anyone properly placed will be able to realize a portion of that windfall. State level action such as this will create a viable small business base for the US to consolidate that lead. The truth is, we can't rely on traditional markets any longer. Newly developed nations with newer infrastructure are in a better position to capitalize on those markets. We need to find the next big thing, and green industry is it. "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:26 PM:
" Cowlitz1- What country is going to buy our green technology, when oil is $43 a barrel and dropping? "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:32 PM:
" Kalama RR: So if I understand you correctly, FDR interrupted a perfectly acceptable policy when he superceded Hoover. Unfortunately, that wasn't in any of the US history books I've read. As I understand it, programs the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Power Administration, etc. did exactly what you described and, along with WWII, created the conditions for the US to be THE SUPERPOWER of the latter half of the 20th century. While it is clear that Japan's spending has not eased its recession, niether has buying foreign paper, playing with the discount rate and intentionally increasing inflation in order to lower the national debt. I think a reform to the BOJ and the Japanese banking system is necessary to see any real gains from increasing public works contracts. However, they are basing that spending on a model that worked, the US model following the Great Depression as illustrated in the CCC, WPA and other agencies. "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:35 PM:
" Cowlitz1- I have no problems with green technologies as outlined in your last post. As long as it is done with private capitol, not with taxpayer money! What I object to is recycling money from my pockets to the government in the form of taxes, then the government spending that money on green projects to stimulate the economy or improving infrastructure when we are running huge deficits delaying a recovery that would benefit ALL! "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 7:35 PM:
" How long do you think $43 barrels of oil will last with OPEC slashing production in order to keep up demand? Additionally, there are a few nations out there, less enlightened than the bloggers here, who still believe that fossil fuel consumption results in environmental degradation and climate change. Of course, they could just follow Medvedev's lead and get cozy with Chavez in order to ensure continuous flow of fossil fuels as well. "
golfer wrote on Dec 4, 2008 7:44 PM:
" common sense...You are clearly spoon fed by the likes of Hannity, druggie Limbaugh, man/woman, who cares, Coulter, etal. If you don't believe that humans have an affect on global warming, you are the one drinking the capri sun. "
skeezix wrote on Dec 5, 2008 7:05 AM:
" country gal, and where do you think the business owner gets the money to pay the wages of those who work for them? They don't have a money tree out back. The money to pay those wages comes from you and others each time they make a purchase. It really isn't that different, if at all. Everytime you pay a bill...of any kind....you are contributing to someone's wages, in spite of whether you are paying a government agency or not. I don't know where you work or if you do. I'm rather certain however, that if people who do business with the people you work for quit paying their bills, or making purchases from them, it wouldn't be long until you would no longer have your paycheck. Think it through....slowly...... "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 5, 2008 7:56 AM:
" Cowlitz1- I watch the oil market everyday, CNBC is the station on my T.V. from 5:30 in the morning to 2:00 in the afternoon. I spend the time in between reading and writing about the stock market and the economy at length. OPEC has not reduced their output and the next meeting is not scheduled until Dec. 17 in Algeria. Furthermore, demand has decreased faster than outputs have declined evidenced by our build in inventory.(320.4 million barrels). The big unknown is how severe a recession or slow down China's economy will suffer,(China does not release economic data like other countries do)But if there is a substantial slowdown in China, oil possibly will hit $25 a barrel. I do not expect oil to raise until the value of the dollar declines(at this point I believe we will be in a Hyper-inflation period). It takes oil priced at over $75 a barrel to make any green projects economically viable. But I do Respect your opinions :) "
skeezix wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:16 AM:
" Kalama River Resident... While I appreciate your knowledge offered up in your post, I have to take issue with your closing comment..."It takes oil priced at over $75 a barrel to make any green projects economically viable." That is the sort of thinking that has to change. That kind of thinking is why the big three are lobbying for us to bail them out. They would be working on efficiency...oil prices came down... the kept building vehicles that were inefficient. Other manufacturers stayed the course for effecient cars and are kicking the US auto makers in the behind. Any look at the big three right now would show that oil prices, even as low as they are now, are not economically viable right now. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:37 AM:
" To Cowlitz1 and golfer, I will say this again. In a time when needy services are being cut by an overspending Liberal governor, this was unnecessary and a waste of tax payer dollars that we don't have to waste. You can make your environmental arguments all you want. The fact is the budget bottom line did not this. There is nothing in this report that common sense could not have figured out. And if the governor can't plot a path forward without these types of govt. waste, then it is time we seek a recall. She has to lead and this isn't leadership. This is taxpayer dollar waste. "
DW wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:50 AM:
" Cowblitz1, if you think "green" technology is the only way to go, and there is money to be made, I suggest you get some investors, start your own "green" technology business and get back to us when you are a millionair. The only people that are going to make money in the "green movement" are the Al Gore types when they start dealing in CO2 immissions, a.k.a. Cap and Trade. And the billions of dollars that are going to go to the Al Gore types are going to come out of our pockets in the for of taxes, higher energy cost etc. Also, you keep mentioning that we don't produce anything in this country anymore. I suggest you look at the giant steam plums that rise from town on the Columbia river. They are producing consumables for people. The thing is if people like you, and Obama, get your way, your going to put these companies out of business because it will be to expensive to produce stuff with the enviromental wackyness you people are suggesting. So do us a favor, go build your hydro car, your solar panel, your anti-matter reactor and get back to us when you have saved the world from global warming. In the mean time we will be needing energy resources to keep us warm because we are entering a cooling period that some scientist say may last between 100 and 300 years. Which is NORMAL!!!! "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:56 AM:
" skeezix-If you want private capitol to invest in green technology, there has to be a incentive to invest, that means PROFITs. You can not have profits with green, when you are competing with cheap oil. Just take a look at the prices of a few stocks of the green movement SOLF(-80%), YGE(-80%), ESLR(-75%). This has been in the last six months! I do agree that in the long term, green will become more efficient and will compete with oil on a cost basis. But that will not happen until oil is $75 a barrel. (T. Boone Pickens invested 6 months ago and has suffered severe losses betting on green tech.)- If you want to change thinking why don't you invest your hard earned money into green technology? Is the risk worth the reward when oil is $42 a barrel and still dropping? (read my previous post on lowering capitol gains, that could spur increased investments) "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:02 AM:
" KRR: You are right OPEC has not slahed production yet. It seems like the dec 17 meeting will probably result in that though. However, if OPEC does decrease production and consumer confidence returns, you will see prices over $150 a barrel. I think we should hedge our bets now in order to be prepared for that. Eventually the economy will right itself again, then gas prices will be a problem. However, your logic is very applicable to the current situation. I just wonder how long the current situation will last? TDNBB: You might try and elucidate a little on your argument, saying the same thing over and over isn't really convincing anyone that doesn't already agree with you. I believe in gov't accountablity and if programs such as these were implemented without investigation by a state task force, I would be with you in calling for a recall. As it stands, minimal spending has occurred, we have a better grasp of what is effective. This is how you construct policy, not through unilateral action whose effects have not been investigated! "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:17 AM:
" skeezix- Listen to the hearings for more than five minutes and you will find that less fuel efficient cars are not the reasons for the failure of the Detroit automakers (I listened all day yesterday and this morning) The foreign automakers sells are also down heavily. What is going to happen if Congress mandates that the big three must build green vehicles, and gas stays below $2 a gallon for the next ten years? Are you willing to spend $45,000 for a Volt, when gas is below $2? IMHO I do not think the average American will. G.M. is doomed even with government intervention. "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:27 AM:
" Cowlitz1-We finally agree, and the big question is when will the dollar collapse and commodities explode in upward momentum, I wish I knew the answer! It could be in the next six months, or in the next five years. A lot of that relies on the economic condition of China. Long-Gold and Silver!!! "
Gondolapete wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:33 AM:
" "Combating climate change" is the most absurd statement that can be uttered in English, or any other language for that matter..And people actually believe this is a real problem...!!!!! Never mind that facts using reliable weather models have proven that the world heats up and down in cycles..oh no..none of that matters...fixing an agenda based, made up problem is what matters.... "
skeezix wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:40 AM:
" Kalama River - In no way did I intend to give the impression that fuel effieciency or the lack thereof, is the only reason for the downturn. I also agree that GM will likely fail. Am I willing to pay $45K for a volt? No...regardless of gas prices. However, I'm also not going to pay $25K for a shabbily built vehicle with poor fuel economy when I can pay the same for an import with better quality and efficiency. "
Gondolapete wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:07 AM:
" Anyone interested in seeing how "udderly" ridiculous this is getting?????
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28070487/wid/18298287/?GT1=45002 "
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28070487/wid/18298287/?GT1=45002 "
country gal wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:38 AM:
" skeezix: I know what you're implying about where business owners get their dollars from. However, they, too have to pay more than regular taxpayers' share of paying taxes and fees to the state and federal workers. Therefore, the more you burden them with, the chances of them they either have to layoff or belly up. I STILL STAND BY MY CONVICTIONS! THE LESS STATE AND FEDERAL WORKERS THERE ARE THE BETTER. ALL CAN GET A CHANCE OF THE AMERICAN PIE!!!!! "
DW wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:52 AM:
" Your exactly right Gondolapete, taxing farmers because their cows belch and fart is a perfect example of the enviro wackyness these people like cowblitz1 are proposing. If solar panels could produce cheap energy everyone would have them, but they don't. If hydrogen powered cars were economically viable, everyone would have one, but they don't. If we could build an anti-matter reactor we would, but that isn't possible. What these people are going to do is start taxing and mandating tolls to force people to change there lifestyle because they will not be able to afford to do otherwise. All in the name of saving ourselves from ourselves. Why don't we just get to the source of the problem and fix that. If mankind is causing all of the problems on the planet, and the planet is worth saving,(until the next astoroid, comet, or nickel/iron meteor strikes us and sterilizes the planet), why don't we just outlaw mankind. We could make all newborns incapable of reproducing, and ta da, in a few decades, no more man to pollute the planet. Almost sounds as wacky as what some of these enviro nut jobs want to do to us, except my plan will be 100% effective. In the mean time the enviros will tinker with humanity with unintended consequences that will be worse than if we continue to live good normal lifestyles. "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:55 AM:
" Gondola: While a tax on factory farms is another debate in and of itself, the premise of the article is that climate change is occurring. I'm not sure how this supports your position that the majority of the scientific community around the world is wrong. Country Gal: the reality is we all depend on state services everyday. Those services are managed by state employees. State employees are funded by tax dollars, but we recieve a service in return for those taxes, much as we do at the grocery store, jiffy lube etc. The "extra" taxes that an employer pays are for L&I and a number of other employee services. Yes, some of that goes to pay for gov't employees, but most of it is paid back out in claims. I don't think it is quite as simple as you imagine it. "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 5, 2008 11:02 AM:
" DeeDub: Most people have a car now. Owning a car was prohibitively expensive until Ford engaged in mass production. Every technology is expensive from the outset. But, I digress, this task force addressed energy-efficient buildings, traffic and a number of other concerns. You consider this wacky? I wouldn't mind cutting down my heating bill by making my building more efficient, especially if I am going to get a tax break for it. Call me crazy! "
Gondolapete wrote on Dec 5, 2008 11:14 AM:
" Cowlitz1, of course climate change is occuring..it occurs every day, every minute, every second..its called "weather"...!!!!! And who makes up the "majority" of scientists???? Ever see the list of many of the so called "scientists"??? You or anyone else for that matter, including this "majority" can provide one single document that proves global warming being caused by man is a fact...you know why?? because there is no documents!!!!!Oh and I find it convenient that its been changed to "climate change" That was to cover all bases..too hot..climate change...too cold, climate change..not enough snow...climate change...too much rain...climate change....too little rain..climate change....and on this, we have deemed ourselves as "Brilliant"!!! We have predicted WEATHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "
country gal wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:01 PM:
" Cowlitz1: I don't think you catch my 'drift'. I go online and I see too many depts that I don't know what kind of services they are? The federal and state workers are paid by taxpayers and businesses alone (and also their health and retirement benefits) while business owners, thru taxpayers help, have to pay their employees, including their SS and Federal and in some instances state and licensing, taxes, fees, etc. "
DW wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:34 PM:
" Cowblitz1, there is nothing wrong with building energy efficient buildings and such. But what some of these people are proposing is whole sales changes in lifestyle, like banning large vehicles, are tacking on huge taxes on things that people want. I don't want to drive a tinker toy car. I like my large pick-up truck, that isn't harming anything,(unless your driving one of those tinker toy cars and blow a red when I'm driving through an intersection, then your in for a world of hurt). I will say it again Cowblitz1, put your money where your mouth is and start a business to develop green technology. The problem is most technology of that type can't stand on it's own merits and needs massive amounts of funding, i.e. taxes to be viable. Take ethanol for instance, the government subsidizes it because takes 1.3 barrels of oil to make 1 barrel of ethanol, and it dropped the mileage of my truck by 14%. So I burn more fuel, and it takes more oil to make ethanol than it produces. So this is my point about unintended consequences, almost everything about ethanol is bad, unless you are a corn farmer. Like I said go into the great big world with your whacky enviro ideas, try to make some money, and let me know how it goes. Esp. without the tax payers subsidizing it!!! Climate change is nothing more than a scam!!! "
country gal wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:42 PM:
" Cowlitz1: also on top of that, businesses have utilities and maintenance, leasing and insurance and more. I'm sure the taxpayers are also paying for the state and federal utilities and maintenance expenses. Need I go on? "
kalama river resident wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:47 PM:
" Gondolapete- Thank-you, you have enlightened me!!! I never did notice the shift of the phrase, from global warming to climate change. Them sly dogs! But now if we can predict the weather, and through carbon dioxide emissions, we can manipulate the weather, we should wait for it to warm up an average of 8-10 degrees and immediately stop the emissions. Then we could grow Oranges,watermelons and o' yea my favorite Avocados. I am starting to warm to the idea of "climate change" Just think of all the money we could save on heating cost! and it would be sunny all day long, and solar panels would be worth their initial investment. ;) "
skeezix wrote on Dec 5, 2008 1:07 PM:
" country gal....you can go on if you would like, but you're making yourself look rather foolish. If you shop anywhere, what you pay goes to cover all the things you list. I don't think you quite get that. In response to your other post, businesses don't pay an employee's taxes...they withold them from the employee's earnings...i.e., the employee is paying the taxes. While I'm not sure what you mean by a business paying an employees licensing, fees, etc., that would be voluntary. I am required to be licenced by the state. I'm responsible for the cost of that license. If my employer were to pick up that tab, I'd be grateful. However, it is my responsiblity to obtain and maintain my license. Cowlitz 1 is correct, this is not as simple as you are imagining it to be. "
Gondolapete wrote on Dec 5, 2008 1:35 PM:
" For those of you that actually study these issues, like myself, even defenders of this scam cant deny we are getting cooler..but that does not mean anything is their disclaimer...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/05/climate-change-weather "
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/05/climate-change-weather "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 5, 2008 3:01 PM:
" Gondolapete: Did you actually read the article, or just the headline? As for a list of scientists, start with Kyoto, then Rio, then look at published documents from nearly every accredited University, then follow their footnotes to their sources, etc. While I appreciate that all of you are using this as a forum for expressing your disgruntlement with whatever you have concluded is the "green" movement (ethanol and solar appear to be the favored gripes), the principles that form the basis of the movement are the same principles that engineers and designers have been pursuing for years, efficiency and the elimination of waste. Now the issue has become more timely and our perception of what constitutes waste has evolved, "green" has come to describe the new level of efficiency. Drag your feet and argue that it isn't happening all that you want, however, I appreciate that our state is providing ways for me to realize profit off of those changes. Personally, I don't care if you drive a large truck, many in the area require it for their profession, I see no reason to deprive them of that. However, the truth is, it is inefficient for everyday use. If you want to use it everyday, fine, just expect to pay more than those who have adopted more efficient means of transport. The world is changing, if you don't believe me, read Gondolapete's article. Those of us not on board will be left behind. I am glad Washington will not. "
Gondolapete wrote on Dec 5, 2008 5:29 PM:
" Yes Cowlitz I read the article..I also asked you to provide a list of credible scientists..not a list of agenda driven socialists...You need some tips on how to research this? "
country gal wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:04 PM:
" I know my comment sounds foolish to you because you don't think they way I do. I know employers withhold our earnings because it's an automatic thing. Therefore, what's the difference. And like you say, you agree with Cowlitz1 that it's not as simple as we imagine it to be. Why is that? That makes me very suspicious. I still like to know why are there so many different depts in the state and federal and what purpose do they serve? "
ItsKarma wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:08 PM:
" Cowlitz 1: You give me hope!
The rest,1.if we quit giving the Middle East trillions of dollars every year=good for economy (bad for terrorists) 2.If we make the earth cleaner = good for health 3.if we create jobs people can buy products, pay taxes, be happier.
The Earth does go through cycles of heating and cooling=mass extinctions, in the past these were caused by volcanoes, meteors etc..Now this is caused by pollution mostly from fossil fuels.
So we are not trying to make you use cleaner fuel to torment you we are trying to save the planet so that all of our great grandchildren can breathe the air drink the water and see a damn tree!
Quit being such whiners and do your part! "
The rest,1.if we quit giving the Middle East trillions of dollars every year=good for economy (bad for terrorists) 2.If we make the earth cleaner = good for health 3.if we create jobs people can buy products, pay taxes, be happier.
The Earth does go through cycles of heating and cooling=mass extinctions, in the past these were caused by volcanoes, meteors etc..Now this is caused by pollution mostly from fossil fuels.
So we are not trying to make you use cleaner fuel to torment you we are trying to save the planet so that all of our great grandchildren can breathe the air drink the water and see a damn tree!
Quit being such whiners and do your part! "
dude wrote on Dec 6, 2008 12:00 AM:
" Cowlitz: the green movement isn't going to create new jobs. At best it will replace existing ones. It won't stimulate the ecomony because it will be more expensive. We're headed into a depresssion with our existing debth and soon will be paying out even more pushing us deeper into the depression as the baby boomers keep retiring. Remember the goverment stoled their social security fund and we will be paying more for that. Medicare is going to fail. We'll be looking for the cheapest energy if we can afford it at all. The green movement will not get us out of this mess. "
vikingtwin5 wrote on Dec 6, 2008 10:12 PM:
" Gondolapete;Since you are such a research expert, I'm sure you know that for every crackpot conspiracy theorist out there, there are dozens of sites that support the concept of human-caused climate change. Let's start with NASA, NOAA, the EPA. Your list of credible scientists I'm sure is limited to people that agree with you. Oh, I haven't seen a list from you. I think I'll stick with those agenda-driven socialists at NASA, NOAA etc. By the way, calling someone or something socialist didn't work for the McCain-Palin gang and it won't work here either, you end up looking just as foolish as they did. "
DW wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:28 AM:
" itskarma, I have a question for you. I would like you to name the top 3 sources of oil that the United States taps into? I'll wait a few hours for your response then I will enlighten the world with the answer. "
DW wrote on Dec 7, 2008 3:08 PM:
" O.K. didn't get a bite on that one, so here is the answer, #1 importer to the U.S. is Canada, #2 importer of oil to the U.S. is Mexico and the #3 top importer of oil to the U.S. is Nigeria. The breakdown by region is #1 North America, #2 is Africa and coming in #3 at only 19% of our oil imports is the ENTIRE middle east. This would include countries that don't sponser terror, and are our allies. "
itskarma wrote on Dec 7, 2008 5:14 PM:
" Dear DW, per the Energy Information Administration the leading importers of crude oil for 2008 are...Canada, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Iraq and just for kicks Nigeria rounds out at 6.
REGARDLESS, of where we get the oil from, doesn't it make more sense to keep our money in our own pocket vs theirs? "
REGARDLESS, of where we get the oil from, doesn't it make more sense to keep our money in our own pocket vs theirs? "
itskarma wrote on Dec 7, 2008 5:17 PM:
" OH! And before any of you start about drilling the he$$ out of some of the only clean spots left in America.
Using alternative fuels will help us keep some clean air and water.
Not trying to save some tree or owl or whatever.....just humans. "
Using alternative fuels will help us keep some clean air and water.
Not trying to save some tree or owl or whatever.....just humans. "
tired wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:04 PM:
" OK for all you greenies out there that are listening to Al Gores pile of @#!% spewing out of his mouth heres an interesting article for you to read.If you have an open enough mind to do so that is,because to me I would take the word of the 31,000+ scientists that don't believe in global warming.Heres the link http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=53de09dc-802a-23ad-4ec4-c8accd44a47d "
Cowlitz1 wrote on Dec 8, 2008 8:44 AM:
" I really wish that all of you who posted links to other articles actually read the articles. Tired's article does not dispute humanity's involvement in climate change, nor do any of the links at the bottom of the article. The closest is the article in which a scientist theorizes that the sun may have a larger affect than previoulsy thought. However, even he does not dispute that man is still a significant contributor. Additionally, noting that 31,000, or a fraction of the scientific community, actually agrees with you does nothing to prove your point. It merely quantifies how few actually do question global climate change. "
Saturos wrote on Dec 12, 2008 1:21 PM:
" There is no evidence that carbon dioxide causes global warming! Research it fools! The volcano that erupted in the Philippines a decade of so ago released MORE CARBON DIOXIDE INTO THE ATMOSPHERE THAN HUMAN INSTRUMENTS CAN EVEN RECORD! A gas cloud floated around the earth for a few days and was gone. GONE! NOTHING HAPPENED! Global warming is just one big scam. Let's spend our money on something more productive. Like lottery tickets. "
ItsKarma wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:20 AM:
" Santuros:Lets just imagine you are right....NOW, what would the harm be in our country becoming energy independent? Making the air/water/soil a little cleaner? Learning new and inventive ways to do these things?
Where would the harm be?
Never mind global warming, or the fact that we are supporting countries that raise their children to hate us and want to kill us, or that there is a limit no matter where you drill to fossil fuels. "
Where would the harm be?
Never mind global warming, or the fact that we are supporting countries that raise their children to hate us and want to kill us, or that there is a limit no matter where you drill to fossil fuels. "
Past Month's Most Commented Stories