Save the Planet. Eat your Pet.

[Eric Larsen]

Eric,


The states with the most stringent ecological standards....are losing businesses and jobs.....they are going bankrupt. One of the reasons is higher taxes and yes, the higher ecological standards figure into increased cost to operate a business there.

According to the McGregor book "Environmental Law and Enforcement" the states with the toughest laws are:

California
Connecticut
Delaware
Indiana
Louisiana
Massachusetts
Michigan
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania

Only Michigan, California and Oregon are at the bottom of the unemployment rankings -- but you can make arguments that environmental laws aren't the only reason for California and Michigan's woes.

"It'll cost money" is always the rallying cry of the polluters.

But I'm more concerned about the things we COULD be doing for little or no net cost, but aren't. Recycling, reducing plastic bag consumption (really, who can't bring canvas sacks to the market?), encouraging higher gas mileage (especially the new diesel technology), and MOST OF ALL, training unemployed workers to install PV net-metered solar.

PV solar systems could transform this country. The technology is there, we lack qualified designers and installers. And yet there are millions of Americans who are desperate for a job.


And just one more thing, Ken -- almost every post, I have tried to support my opinions with linked data. I'm no fool. I know that numbers can be skewed and data fudged. But at least I'm trying to show I'm not just pulling numbers and facts out of my posterior.

Every reply from you has been a variety of "It costs too much" and "Business will suffer!" -- with nothing to support it.


I think Greg's right -- there is huge opportunity out there for green industry. Opportunity is knocking, and we're wasting precious time with partisan bickering.

Every year, our options on how to address climate change shrink. We're not doing near enough. And we can do a lot more without having to make a big sacrifice.

[Dan Friedrichs]

PV solar systems could transform this country. The technology is there, we lack qualified designers and installers. And yet there are millions of Americans who are desperate for a job.

I actually work in the PV field, engineering inverters for grid-tie systems. PV has a place and a use, but what you say is untrue: There is no lack of designers/installers. The problem is that, with current electric rates, our best designs will take 20+ years to produce enough electricity to justify their cost, and system lifespans are generally ~30 years. Additionally, you get huge problems with power distribution - sure, the PV supplies plenty of juice in the middle of the day, but you also have to plan for a week of cloudiness, which means having full-capacity nukes/coal ready to step in and take PV's place. If you're going to build a full capacity coal plant anyways, why add PV? (there are reasons, of course, but the solution is not cut-and-dried "Put PV everywhere!" like you seem to think)

Locally 2 trucks pickup up trash.....1 for combined trash and 1 for separated recycling. What is the carbon footprint caused by running the 2nd truck? What is the carbon footprint of remanufacturing the recyclibles into a product?

Exactly. What really bugs me is the "recycling" of glass. Drive a truck around town, collect bits of dirty glass, wash the glass, crush the glass, re-melt the glass, and make new glass. Versus just going and getting a truckload of clean, fresh sand. Apparently the recycled glass takes about 25% less energy to re-melt, but then again, collecting it is a pain.

I think what we need is not just people running around screaming about how important recycling is, we need some reasonability, too. Using enough energy to MELT SAND to make a container for a $1 jar of spaghetti sauce is a poor use of energy.

Call someone at your city office and ask!

You are suggesting that recyclables are valuable commodities, that's why we should save them and recycle them, rather than throw them away. If that were true, we wouldn't need government intervention - private enterprise would step in and collect these "valuables". Since that isn't happening, you must be wrong. Someone has considered this business plan, and decided that the value of recyclables (in terms of raw materials and energy) is less than the cost to haul and process them.

[Greg Peterson]

Ken, any serious scientific claim must pass peer review. Sure scientists have a hunch or even a bias. But to imply the community at large is engaged in some vast conspiracy is a bit hard to buy.

The only ones that I've seen or heard claim the climate change isn't real are persons or organizations that have a stake in the status quo.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Greg,

If all scientific studies must pass peer review, why are there so many studies announced and the rejected later? Medical studies are a really good example. Those are announced and then rejected several months if not a couple of years later.

I suggest that most peer groups are there for the benefit of the peers not the public.

[Eric Larsen]

the solution is not cut-and-dried "Put PV everywhere!" like you seem to think)

It's seven years here in Southern Nevada, not 20. I'm good with those numbers. And after 15 months, I'm still near the bottom of the list, waiting for installers.

I'd LOVE to get into the PV industry here -- but I have no desire to climb around on roofs. I'm a bit old for that.

A week of cloudy days? I wish I could see that.

You are suggesting that recyclables are valuable commodities, that's why we should save them and recycle them, rather than throw them away. If that were true, we wouldn't need government intervention - private enterprise would step in and collect these "valuables". Since that isn't happening, you must be wrong. Someone has considered this business plan, and decided that the value of recyclables (in terms of raw materials and energy) is less than the cost to haul and process them.

My local recycling center (less than a mile away), will pay me for metal. So obviously, that has SOME value. Las Vegas is happy to pay for recycling pickup because it has some value compared to chucking it all into a landfill.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

You are certainly welcome to your opinion Eric!

So am I.