06/27/2009 06:14:39 AM EST

New Energy Bill not such a big deal, it's no Kyoto

posted by JaimeH

What's the big deal with the Bill? It is referenced to  2005 levels. European commitment to Kyoto means a 20% reduction of 1990 levels. A 17% reduction by 2020 really means a mere 3% of 1990 levels. So the most contaminating country of the world will reduce its contamination by 3% in regards to 1990 levels. WOW!!

http://www.elpais.com/artic ulo/sociedad/esfuerzo/impor tante/elpepusoc/20090627elp episoc_3/Tes

This article is in Spanish so you can practice tu Español

Change we can believe in!!

JaimeH

Email Print
Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit Facebook
< Great video contrasting Iran election and 2000 USA election | Young Turk's Miracle >
 Display:
New Energy Bill not such a big deal, it's no Kyoto | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden)
Well, (none / 0)
keep in mind, even if that was the long hoped for introduction of environmental responsiblitiy and/or accountability for the U.S., the next climate change denying republican administration will water down or even abandon all regulations in that direction. Unless there is pertinent pressure by the international community to push for those reductions.

OTOH: those 3% might be more than a couple of smaller countries' combined emissions.

p.s.: mi español really would need some furbishing... The clause "parece que podría empezar a dejar de ser" almost drove me crazy. That is verbal chicanery!

by eborujion on 06/27/2009 11:05:47 AM EST

Keep in mind (none / 0)
The next climate change denying republican won't give a rat turd what the international community thinks of him/her.  Remember, geography to them consists of:
 The United states.
  Those foregn weak european guys.
  The country of africa.  
Our personal manufacturing slaves in asia

by birdboy1 on 06/27/2009 11:44:30 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Too bad the aim of this bill... (none / 0)
Isn't protecting the environment - the aim of this bill is to generate revenue and destroy energy companies and manufacturers by taxing them out of existence. The ultimate goal of this bill is the eventual government takeover of our energy production... I know the Liberals like the idea of total government control, but most people don't - that's why we oppose this bill. :)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2009 04:22:46 PM EST

And you make this claim (none / 0)
Based on what exactly?

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 06/27/2009 10:59:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Based on... (none / 0)
the fact that this bill, by the posters own admission, does virtually nothing to help the environment, but does raise taxes on virtually EVERY private entity that emits CO2. This includes most all manufacturers, power companies and every other taxable entity they can get their hands on!

:)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2009 11:11:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Can't have it both ways... (none / 0)
Either it taxes all private entities to death or it does nothing to help the environment... Choose!

by eborujion on 06/27/2009 11:32:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You suppose most people are like you? (none / 0)
Yup, government control of the energy production and distribution would be desirable IMO. There, I said it! Unfortunately (for me) that bill does nothing like that. Taxing them out of existence: rofl. Wouldn't it be easier to just nationalize the companies? Are you familiar with GATS and its implications?

by eborujion on 06/27/2009 11:30:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
New Energy Bill not such a big deal, it's no Kyoto | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: