One engineers perspective on global warming 33

In forum1554 MVP members of eng-tips.com develop articles for publication on the Internet. This informal peer-review process has resulted in several articles being published thus far. Early indications make this seem to be an effective way to make information available to the engineering profession.

One of the articles was on my perspective on global warming. It was published today.

I would be very interested to participate in a discussion here about the article or the subject in general. There were several conversations that were started and then cut short in the Engineering Writers Guild because that group is intended to promote publication, not debate points of view. If anyone want to take up those conversations, this is the place to do it (although it is too late to correct formatting, grammar, or punctuation errors).

The article is available at: One engineer's perspective on global warming

Thank you to all of those who worked hard on this article to keep me more or less honest. I had a lot of help, but at the end of the day any errors and/or omissions are mine. I'll share the credit for the good stuff, but I own the mistakes.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[rconnor]

For you to think you can solve the climate problem without preserving the rain forests is a lot more baffling than anything else I can think of in this thread.

...

This is not to say that forest conservation isn’t important

Forest conservation is incredibly important to minimizing climate change

But again, let me be very clear to you (as we share a lot of common ground), forest conservation is vital.

I'll leave your tired and weak argument with the following: we need forest conservation AND we need a clean power supply.

...this is why I really need to leave this topic.

(also, when have I ever advocated for Cap and Trade? I continually support revenue neutral carbon taxes, such as in BC. Here's where the money went:

...taxes raised by the tax (which dropped emissions/capita by 10% while GDP grew 3.8% (CANSIM tables 379-0025 and 379-0026)):
•Low Income Tax Credit – $195 million
•5% Reduction in first two personal income tax rates (the poorest) - $235 million
•General corporate income tax reduction (12% to 11%) - $450 million
•Small business corporate income tax reduction (4.5% to 3.5%) - $261 million
•Source

)

 

[beej67]

"Lets do conservation too!" again?

If we had infinite money we could fix all of the world's problems. We've covered that.

The point is of paramount importance, because the science is being used to drive policy. I want you to either support the current administration's policy of spending the available money on CO2 mitigation and ignoring conservation, or abandon it.

Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com