The economic aspect, that's the standard answer when all else fails. All these years spent debating this, how much money has actually been spent on meaningful technology? Scrubbers for the smoke stacks, energy companies instead of raising rates because the cost of dirty fuel goes up maybe they could build some wind generators, government vehicle fleets consisting of hybrids rather than large gas guzzling SUV's? Zilch.
Instead efforts are aimed at denying, denouncing and defamation. Or the eco-terrorist is painted as the standard environmentalist, out to destroy our society, a gross misrepresentation. The solution is easy, if pre-concieved notions are tossed aside. Think of the last year spent discussing this in Canada. Think of the ridiculous $4.5 Billion cut to government funds(GST), which could be the snowball that gets the whole thing moving. Not $4.5 Billion on programs which are inflated beurocratic bull sh!t, but investments by our government in our industry, which guess what, will spur growth at no cost to our Economy. Sounds so easy doesn't it, if only it weren't for the cost to a politicians political power base...
Cutting the GST makes for great gains in politics. What do you suppose meaningful investment in trully cleaner air would have done for Harper? I'll tell you one thing, people would care less about what Dion says.
West, the mirror in space is hogwash. Roughly half the earth is covered by darkness at all times, where are we going to deploy the mirrors without disrupting plants and animals etc? I certainly don't want that shade anywhere near me. The fact that these ideas are even given credence should be an indicator that things might not be so copasetic.
