Environmentalists Seek to Defeat Bush

[angus]

Some time ago, I forget exactly when, but Sierra Magazine had an interesting article about our 'ecological footprint' and an accompanying quiz.  I can dig it up when I get home if you're interested.  Markdel and Gustaf and I were having a discussion about something (maybe you were there?) and I got into this anti-regulation diatribe.  I know autoplaigarism is the height of laziness, but since I'm lazy I'll do just that.  This is what I typed on March 4:

Let's be honest.  US residents (as well as OECD country residents such as Swedes) use far more than their share.  If you divide number of people in the world by the number of acres of land (assume some favorite area unit gustaf, it's all proportional), the number of acres available to support a person is approximately 4.3 acres.  Your 'ecological footprint'  to use a Sierra Club (enviro lobbying group) term, is defined roughly as acres per capita to support the population in terms of food, transportation, and housing.  {use your imagination}  On average, each of us uses 25 acres (16ish in sweden), or thereabouts.  If everyone lived like we did we would need almost six planets!  That's the green party line.  Okay, no one is saying we need to live like Pakis, for example, who use about 1.7 acres, or Sub-Saharan Africans, who use less (conjure up bleeding heart image of extended belly child), but it is something to consider.

I recycle, turn off the lights, take my bicycle to work when the weather permits, and often use public transportation instead of my big gas-guzzling mercedes.  I like to think I'm very environmentally aware (and that's not just something I picked up when I moved to California).  But when I took the quiz my 'ecological footprint' was 24.5 acres!  I use up resources like an average Yankee or Canadian, according to their algorithm.  (it was frequent flying that got my number up so high, actually, and this is hard to avoid.  I need to go places, and in order to get there in a timely fashion I have to jet.  Too f-ing bad, mother earth.)  Now, there's no way I'm going to stop eating pigs and chickens and cows and fish, because I enjoy the taste of blood too much, but I have since been much more careful to use less energy whenever possible.

And on March 12 I posted this:
Capitalism can actually reward business who are environmentally responsible.  A major problem is that the Left, over the years, has successfully lobbied for such stringest legislation in the US (particularly in CA) that corporate entities must account for every bit of waste from the "cradle to grave."  This results in exhorbitant costs to the taxpayers, of course, and that's what Republicans are always bitching about.  But it goes deeper than that.  For example, consider the possibility of 'linked industries':  say a local cement manufacturing company would like to buy waste products from tire manufacturers or cola producers or T-shirt makers to burn to heat their kilns and then use their own gaseous combustion products to flow into a third industry, as a fuel.  Whatever.  This is entrepernurial imagination.  This potentially recycles waste and perhaps reduces cost, thereby increases profit.  But no.  The wastes, at each step of the way must be dealt with according to strict bureaucratic standards.  Written by a large and costly bureaucratic staff.

I am still thinking about your question, but this is a start.

[dunn]

Environmental groups target Bush


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/22/environmentalists.bush.ap/index.html

[angus]

Earth Day can be painful for republicans, but it doesn't have to be.  In keeping with the upsurge of interest in the libertarians ("I want total freedom but am unwilling to spend one dime on a standing army and navy to protect that freedom"), I thought it might be useful to point out that not every capitalist exhibits Randian contempt for mother earth.  Here is one organization which provides information to conservatives who do NOT believe that environmentalism is antithetical to industry:

http://www.repamerica.org

I am not a member, but I occassionally find their take on environmentally-related stories refreshing.  As a Republican and an active member of the Sierra Club, I enjoy being flamed by "both sides"  Some of you might also enjoy the sensation as well.

[MN-Troy]

NV is an interesting case. The Yucca mountain thing may yet come back to bite Bush on the ass.

Bush won Nevada in 2000, and he only promised to block a temporary storage site.

It's hard to say if that will "bite Bush in the ass" because the most recent polls have the President ahead in that state.

[© tweed]

Big surprise.  Nobody really thought the tree-huggers were Bush fans.

[Chiahead]

I've always been a big fan for the REP, I think I might have mentioned that before, but just for the record.

[Wakie]

Big surprise.  Nobody really thought the tree-huggers were Bush fans.

Some days I truly wonder which party you belong too.

[??????????]

I believe in saving our enviroment like anyone else. I just think their are far to many ridiculous regulations that prevent our country from moving forward. We are paying out the nose for our gas right now because the enviroMENTALISTS won't allow new refineries to be built or oil to be drilled.

[Jorge Estrada]

I believe in saving our enviroment like anyone else. I just think their are far to many ridiculous regulations that prevent our country from moving forward. We are paying out the nose for our gas right now because the enviroMENTALISTS won't allow new refineries to be built or oil to be drilled.

The reason gas prices are so high right now is because consumption is at an all time high whereas production has been reduced by OPEC.  Some of this is the increase in gas guzzling SUVs.  Most of this is because China and India are consuming more oil than ever before.  Drilling in the national wildlife refuge will not produce enough oil to make up the difference and lower prices.  Reducing demand by increasing the fuel economy standards on automobiles will reduce price.  Simple economics.

[??????????]

Opec doesn't even supply 1/4 of the oil that this nation uses on a daily basis. I wish you all would get off this OPEC fix. Their are plenty of sites in the U.S. to drill and make up for OPEC. Fuel standards have been getting a lot better in this nation. Hybrid sales are taking off. When they start making realistically sized vehicles that are hybrid sales will get even better. Why cram into a little Prius when you can have enough room for your family in an Explorer?

[Jorge Estrada]

Opec doesn't even supply 1/4 of the oil that this nation uses on a daily basis. I wish you all would get off this OPEC fix. Their are plenty of sites in the U.S. to drill and make up for OPEC. Fuel standards have been getting a lot better in this nation. Hybrid sales are taking off. When they start making realistically sized vehicles that are hybrid sales will get even better. Why cram into a little Prius when you can have enough room for your family in an Explorer?

Where are these sites that can be drilled to make up the global increase in demand?  The answer is no where.  Reagan would have drilled them in the 80s.

Fuel efficiency is not improving at the rate it could and should.  People need to stop whining about the cost of filling up when they aren't willing to buy more fuel efficient automobiles.

[??????????]

I am more worried about supplying the US right now. We should not be supplying the rest of the world. Texas, California, Alaska, in the Gulf among other places. Like I said before, if the size of these new fuel effecient vehicles was more realistic people would buy them more. I hear that Ford is working on a Hybrid SUV.

[Jorge Estrada]

We should be focusing on supplying America.  But if someone in China or India is willing to pay more for the oil then the company which drilled it in Texas is going to sell it to them and therefore raise the price for the American consumer.  America simply does not have the oil reserves to meet the increasing world demand.  We need to go all out on fuel efficiency and alternative energy.

I'd like to see more people driving more fuel efficient vehicles.  But if someone wants to drive a gas guzzler I don't think they should complain about the cost to fill it up.  It's like the fat kid who eats all the hot dogs and then complains about there not being enough.

[??????????]

You have yet to answer me on that question. Do you think the fuel effecient hybrids would sell better if they were of a realistic size?

[Jorge Estrada]

You have yet to answer me on that question. Do you think the fuel effecient hybrids would sell better if they were of a realistic size?

I assume so but I'm no marketing guru.  Lexus is coming out with a luxury hybrid.  More should be done.  Simply drilling more isn't going to solve the problem.

[??????????]

Yes, but we should continue drilling to meet demand. We cant suddenly cut back oil and expect people to buy hybrids. Their needs to be incentive. Russia has plenty of untapped oil if we chose to pursue it.

[Jorge Estrada]

I don't think we should cut back.  But I also don't think we should start cutting environmental protections just because a fat kid doesn't want to drive a more efficient car.

If we could get the Russians to drill more that would be great.  But it isn't in their interest to flood the world oil market and how do you convince the Russians to do anything?

I'm not an environmentalists because I love the Earth.  I don't really think mankind can hurt the Earth.  It has survived meteors, the ice age, continental drift, etc.  It may change slightly and glow bright green, but will be fine.  I'm an environmentalist because I love people.  If we make the planet glow green it will be us who will be going away.  Like the dinosaurs.  Never to return.  The cockroach will then takeover.

[??????????]

Enviromental restrictions are so tight now in some state that if you fart you get fined. Thats crazy. Here in Florida we only had 3 counties that had emissions standards. In the year 2000 they were gotten rid of. They were deemed far to expensive and of no help other then raising funds. We no longer have any emissions standards in any county in Florida. And our air is not any deadlier now that it was before.

[Wakie]

Enviromental restrictions are so tight now in some state that if you fart you get fined. Thats crazy. Here in Florida we only had 3 counties that had emissions standards. In the year 2000 they were gotten rid of. They were deemed far to expensive and of no help other then raising funds. We no longer have any emissions standards in any county in Florida. And our air is not any deadlier now that it was before.

Dude ... which states have outlawed farting?

[??????????]

I'm just using that as a humorous example (though bad) of how tight the EPA is getting.

[angus]

there's a great southpark episode which deals with such a law

it is true, a little mercaptoethanol goes a long way  

Pfffffffffffrrrrrrrrrtt.   aaah.

[Wakie]

I'm just using that as a humorous example (though bad) of how tight the EPA is getting.

So exactly which environmental standards do you feel are too extreme?

[angus]

I'll go with the antifart legislation.

[??????????]

I'm just using that as a humorous example (though bad) of how tight the EPA is getting.

So exactly which environmental standards do you feel are too extreme?

Laws regarding auto emissions, refining petroleum and drilling for oil.

[Wakie]

I'm just using that as a humorous example (though bad) of how tight the EPA is getting.

So exactly which environmental standards do you feel are too extreme?

Laws regarding auto emissions, refining petroleum and drilling for oil.

So you feel there shouldn't be ANY laws regarding those?  Can you get more specific?