Whether or not the global economy is good, it must become good to accomplish all that must be done. All of our CO2 producing machines must be replaced with non CO2 producing machines, and this can only be done by revving up our CO2 technology to the max to produce the replacements!
We are running out of runway. Who's for cutting the throttle and hitting the brakes? Are we going to fly or end up splattered in a ditch? Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 1:23 PM Subject: Re: a meteorologist speaks on climate change > > On Mar 14, 2006, at 7:49 AM, Keith Nagel wrote: > > > Revtek writes: > >> This is what must happen: > >> 1. The economy must be kept roaring. > > > > Dow index / > > Jan 2000 - 11,500 > > Jan 2006 - 10,780 > > aggregate US economic growth, -6% > > > > Roaring, Rev? How about whimpering like a pimpslapped bitch. > > > Yes, and considering inflation, it is of course worse. A 1999 dollar > was worth 876.79 in 2005. See: > > http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi > > The market actually dropped from 11,500 to roughly 9452, all in 1999 > dollars, a real loss of about 18 percent. The cost of energy is a > real economy killer. > > A concentrated effort on renewable energy could do for the economy > what WWII or the space program did for the economy, and more. The > economic benefits would be permanent. Winning the war and getting to > the moon had only spinoff economic benefits. Solving the energy > problem has *direct* economic benefits. Most people aren't aware of > the costs they will pay for bad government choices, nor the benefits > that can be obtained from the right government choices. The problem > is renewable energy upsets the status quo, so who is there to lobby > for and publicise the right choices? > > Horace Heffner > >
