The Lotus Cars Community banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,211 Posts
I think it is great idea. There seems to be a crazy idea that reducing how much energy some companies use is a bad idea. Americans are incredibly wasteful compared to the rest of the world.

Our economy sucks and the European economy is doing great. Ever think it might be because there companies are more efficienct and have more profit for that reason.

Ed
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,313 Posts
It says in the article that: "critics say the idea is costly, bureaucratic, intrusive and unworkable."

That's what most people on Lotus Talk will think. :D

Personally, I haven't the faintest idea.
 

·
Failed at Self Control
Joined
·
653 Posts
My wife works as a teacher less than 10 minutes from our house. Her carbon-footprint is VERY small. I run my own business and fly all over the place to my clients. I would be screwed. Anyone with a business that forces them to travel would get whacked by this. At first glance I'm not for it.

- z
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,786 Posts
Just like "carbon caps", it's possibly a good idea in theory, but bad in practice. Are you going to make all people/business have the same carbon ration? Some people's jobs/businesses would then become prohibitively expensive, and the jobs would move overseas where carbon isn't regulated. Are you going to set different carbon rations based on where you work/live/etc.? That will be incredibly sensitive to political manipulation. It will also create a huge black market in "carbon access". You'll be buying 5 gallon cans of gas from the guy who used to push crack & meth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,374 Posts
It's stupid, and all based on the questionable premise that CO2 is causing Global Warming. It has yet to be proven that CO2 causes it, and is not instead a result of Global Warming. Yes, several people will quickly post charts that "prove" it, but the reality is that there is still reason to doubt the cause/effect.

Already, there are companies selling "carbon credits", and when they are investigated, you find that they don't make a bit of difference in the actual reduction in "carbon". It's similar to the pollution credits allowed in California - I want to pollute, so I buy your "pollution credit". The result is that there is still the same amount of pollution being released.

If you want to reduce pollution of the generation of CO2, then make it more expensive to do so. As gas prices go up, airline ticket prices go up, heating oil prices go up, etc. you will find that people will cut back on driving, flying, and staying warm.

There is nothing wrong with conserving and not polluting. There is something wrong with forcing people to change their way of life because you think they should.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
I say the idea is costly, bureaucratic, intrusive and unworkable. :D

While I don't think we can keep going as we are, I don't think this would work. Most people see it as a "right" to waste as much as they want. I don't feel that. I had my house built 11 years ago to very high efficiency standards. The most my electric bill has been over that time was $190 for the month of August and that's in Texas. I also drive cars that get 25 to 35 miles per gallon, and have for the last 10 years.

While I can't say I'm doing this for "my children" (I don't have any. :clap: ), I do this because I want to spend my money on things that make me happy. Sports Cars, 52" LCD TV, Bose Audio, XBOX and PS3. I don't feel that spending money on these things is a waste. I'm sure that others would.

I also do animal rescue and have spent thousands of dollars helping dogs, cats, ducks and even wild birds. Another thing that many would see as a waste. I have 5 dogs, 2 cats and 2 ducks as pets now. If I drove a gas guzzler and wasted all my money on things that leave a carbon trail, I would have to had let several animals die before their time. I couldn't face myself if I did that.

It has to be a choice that each person makes. If the government tries to force us to do almost ANYTHING, we all say it's our RIGHT. That's true in most cases. But we have to look at the results. We can all do things to keep these laws from being passed to protect us from ourselves. We just need to think before we act. Waste is a choice and it's about to cost all of us some of our freedom.

Ben
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
I think it is great idea. There seems to be a crazy idea that reducing how much energy some companies use is a bad idea. Americans are incredibly wasteful compared to the rest of the world.

Our economy sucks and the European economy is doing great. Ever think it might be because there companies are more efficienct and have more profit for that reason.

Ed

Umm. No. The idea that there is a "European economy" is false. Some country's in the EU are doing well others are struggling to keep from droping into the 3rd world. That is like commenting on an "American" economy lumping the USA, Canada, in with Mexico. Most of the EU still dreams of matching our GNP and standards of living. But US bashing is vogue now so ,,,continue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
Why not? I always wanted to pay for the privilege to pay for products that are getting more and more expensive by the day... :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
744 Posts
You know what though? With the high unemployment in Europe, this might actually work because it creates jobs! They would need to hire people just for the purpose of keeping track of the "carbon credits" and people would be paid for jobs that would otherwise be non-existant! Hurray for beauraucracy!!
 

·
***** lurker
Joined
·
732 Posts
Do people who participate in physical activities get penalized for their additional CO2 production as well?
What about people with excessive flatulence? or obese people since they tend to breathe heavier all the time? the groceries you buy have to be shipped somehow, are you penalized for buying non-local produce?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,684 Posts
this will definitely lead to mad cows in the U.K.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,221 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
My wife works as a teacher less than 10 minutes from our house. Her carbon-footprint is VERY small. I run my own business and fly all over the place to my clients. I would be screwed. Anyone with a business that forces them to travel would get whacked by this. At first glance I'm not for it.

- z
My thoughts exactly.



Just like "carbon caps", it's possibly a good idea in theory, but bad in practice. Are you going to make all people/business have the same carbon ration? Some people's jobs/businesses would then become prohibitively expensive, and the jobs would move overseas where carbon isn't regulated. Are you going to set different carbon rations based on where you work/live/etc.? That will be incredibly sensitive to political manipulation. It will also create a huge black market in "carbon access". You'll be buying 5 gallon cans of gas from the guy who used to push crack & meth.

And my thoughts exactly.




Everyone has different needs. Could you imagine having to BUY someone else's unused carbon rations? You'd have to be a multi-millionaire for what they'd go for.

And they said that would be operated by an independent company who would take profits from you. GREAT!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
It says in the article that: "critics say the idea is costly, bureaucratic, intrusive and unworkable."

That's what most people on Lotus Talk will think. :D

Personally, I haven't the faintest idea.
I am in complete agreement with everything witten in this post.
%100
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
Umm. No. The idea that there is a "European economy" is false. Some country's in the EU are doing well others are struggling to keep from droping into the 3rd world. That is like commenting on an "American" economy lumping the USA, Canada, in with Mexico. Most of the EU still dreams of matching our GNP and standards of living. But US bashing is vogue now so ,,,continue.
Right on!
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top