Comments on: Transcript of Marburger Interview http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3428 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: mb http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3428&cpage=1#comment-954 mb Fri, 18 Mar 2005 01:03:59 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3428#comment-954 Thanks for posting this. Seems to me that the question is not whether the Kyoto Protocol is the final answer - it was meant to be a first step in which the developed countries largely responsible for anthropogenic greenhouse gas production would show they are taking some responsibility for cleaning up their (our) act, before expecting the developing states to join in the effort. Afterwards there would be stronger moral and political grounds for asking them to sign on. The more appropriate question to be asked is whether the US policy of non adherence, and even undermining Kyoto, will lead ultimately to more effective control of greenhouse gas emissions (even including any of the said technological efforts and expenditures) than taking part in the agreement. I don't think the administration comes anywhere near making this case. Thanks for posting this. Seems to me that the question is not whether the Kyoto Protocol is the final answer – it was meant to be a first step in which the developed countries largely responsible for anthropogenic greenhouse gas production would show they are taking some responsibility for cleaning up their (our) act, before expecting the developing states to join in the effort. Afterwards there would be stronger moral and political grounds for asking them to sign on.

The more appropriate question to be asked is whether the US policy of non adherence, and even undermining Kyoto, will lead ultimately to more effective control of greenhouse gas emissions (even including any of the said technological efforts and expenditures) than taking part in the agreement. I don’t think the administration comes anywhere near making this case.

]]> By: Crumb Trail http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3428&cpage=1#comment-956 Crumb Trail Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:50:16 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3428#comment-956 <strong>Red Environmentalism</strong> Dave Greene at BaySense sees merit in an Economist article advocating that the Republican party should seize the environmental crown laying in the gutter. The emergence of a Republican environmentalism would not only be good for the party, but... Red Environmentalism

Dave Greene at BaySense sees merit in an Economist article advocating that the Republican party should seize the environmental crown laying in the gutter. The emergence of a Republican environmentalism would not only be good for the party, but…

]]> By: Crumb Trail http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3428&cpage=1#comment-955 Crumb Trail Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:49:16 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3428#comment-955 <strong>Red Environmentalism</strong> Dave Greene at BaySense sees merit in an Economist article advocating that the Republican party should seize the environmental crown lying in the gutter. The emergence of a Republican environmentalism would not only be good for the party, but... Red Environmentalism

Dave Greene at BaySense sees merit in an Economist article advocating that the Republican party should seize the environmental crown lying in the gutter. The emergence of a Republican environmentalism would not only be good for the party, but…

]]>