tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post5404323787046334108..comments2023-11-03T02:18:41.733-07:00Comments on WattHead - Energy News and Commentary: Putting Aside Percentages - the Right Target in the Fight Against Global Warming is Carbon Neutrality!Jesse Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00297127385884430247noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-1114072916852217452007-09-07T13:51:00.000-07:002007-09-07T13:51:00.000-07:00Absolutely ... at least as starting point. We shou...Absolutely ... at least as starting point. <BR/><BR/>We should be heading toward Carbon Negative, seeking to restore the health of the global ecology. This is Global Ecological Restoration ... just as we might seek to restore wetlands, forests, and local ecology. <BR/><BR/>Neutral in 2050 stills fixes in all the damage to then (with the lag time for further damage).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-83464094297784744302007-08-27T12:44:00.000-07:002007-08-27T12:44:00.000-07:00Interesting post. It raised a question in my mind....Interesting post. It raised a question in my mind. Humans are unique among all species in being able to even conceptualize global warming, to decide it is a problem, and to act on it. <BR/><BR/>Humans are <I>not</I> unique in their ability to <I>contribute</I> to the problem. Cow methane can contribute, as can plants sucking in CO2, and many other things. Of course, humans are extremely successful colonizers of the planet, and can have a uniquely <I>large</I> effect on warming.<BR/><BR/>The question is this: What makes carbon neutrality the right goal? I understand the basic principle to be something like "don't mess with stuff around you." That sounds like a pretty good idea. But consider two ways of phrasing this goal more precisely:<BR/><BR/>1) Ensure human behavior is carbon neutral (and neutral for all other pollutants)<BR/>2) Ensure that planetary warming occurs at the exact same rate as it <I>would have</I> if all humans did not exist.<BR/><BR/>Note these two goals are <I>not</I> the same. The second goal says roughly that humans should "do whatever the non-human rest of the world does" with respect to global warming. This might mean positive, negative, or neutral emissions.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12058395665313958862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-19419514725983997122007-08-24T15:24:00.000-07:002007-08-24T15:24:00.000-07:00Whohooo!!! Rock on! I totally agree that we need t...Whohooo!!! Rock on! I totally agree that we need to call for a climate neutral U.S. ASAP. Once we do all the right things, like shifting the massive subsidies to renewables, putting a heavy tax on carbon dioxide, cutting the costs of renewables and other necessary technologies within 5 years, and making a climate neutral call mainstream, we will become climate neutral, hopefully in less time than we currently think we can. If we go in imposing an annual cap, sectors will try to achieve annual targets, and sometimes fail. But if we start a revolution that calls for an aggressive, quick transition to a clean energy and energy efficient economy, we will make this transition fast!<BR/><BR/>Carbon/climate neutrality shows the urgency of the problem, and urgency is what we need to make this transition quickly, hopefully within 20 years (of course, let's keep the dates out).<BR/><BR/>I think Step It Up needs to change 1 Sky's call. We suggested it earlier, and we should keep pushing for it. They need to make a major announcement that says that climate neutrality is what we want. We want to finish our contribution to global warming once and for all, and ASAP.<BR/><BR/>Great post! Everybody: please pitch in on this excellent call for a climate neutral U.S. If someone is going to be this aggressive, it's going to have to be us, youth, who have everything to lose from failure to avoid climate catastrophe. Forget what adults/policymakers think is feasible. We know we can make this nation climate neutral quickly because we're doing it on our campuses, in our communities, and in our states. We know that the U.S. has done similar things in the past. We know that this is the only way we can provide ourselves of a safe future. This should be the rallying call at Powershift 2007!Carlos Rymerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15005970638658133694noreply@blogger.com