Re: Yet another empty gesture

[Marc_F_Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:33:14 GMT, nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston) wrote in
message  <45db366b.328110421@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>Australia announced plans to ban incandescent bulbs.
>
>A story in The Age at...
>
>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/the-glass-ceiling/2007/02/20/1171733766181.html
>
>says...
>
>"According to the Government, phasing out incandescent globes over the next
>three years could save about 800,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a
>year by 2012 and as much as 4 million tonnes in 2015."
>
>But goes on to say...
>
>"At best, that would be far less than a 1 per cent cut in Australia's
>greenhouse emissions, which were 564.7 million tonnes at last count in 2004
>and are forecast to keep growing rapidly."
>
>The "far less than a 1 percent cut in Australia's greenhouse emissions"
>agrees with my own analysis which I posted to another thread recently.

ROTFL.  "Analysis" ?!  Some folks are as clueless about what is needed to
actually cause folks to change entrenched behaviour (as even the most casual
acquaintance with the realities of the field of Environmental Education would
provide) as they are about real-world economics.

Self-described curmudgeon to grandson: "There's no point in your starting a
piggy bank because what you'll need for a nursing home will never fit
inside."

I included questions on Gore's _Earth in Balance: Ecology and the Human
Spirit_  in the pre-test to the Environmental Geology courses I taught
beginning in 1993. OP woulda flunked the course as badly as he has his own
real-life economic exam.

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECONtrol.org