Bush's Plan to Stop Global Warming Will Lead to More Global Warming

[Bjorn Against]

Published on Thursday, January 25, 2007 by the Independent / UK
Bush's 'Clean Fuel' Move May Cause More Harm, Say Environmentalists
by Andrew Buncombe


In his address on Tuesday, Mr Bush called for a large boost in the production of alternative fuels, along with an increase in efficiency standards for petrol-engine vehicles. "These technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change," he said.

snip

"There is no revolution in global warming policy in anything the President is proposing, no matter how the White House tries to spin it," said Philip Clapp, the president of the National Environmental Trust. " The numbers are calculated to sound big and impressive but the President is being just as intransigent on global warming as he is on Iraq, ignoring Congress, major business leaders, and the public, who have called for action. "

He added: "The President's proposals will contribute almost nothing to stopping global warming. They will allow our carbon emissions to grow by 14 per cent over the next 10 years."

snip

"Wrongheaded approaches would prove counter-productive - we could end up with somewhat more efficient vehicles running on much dirtier fuels that further accelerate global warming," said Frances Beinecke, the president of the Natural Resources Defence Council. "Turning coal into liquid transportation fuel, for instance, would generate nearly twice the amount of global-warming pollution that today's petroleum-based fuels do.

"Similarly, producing alternative fuels such as ethanol from wood chips that come from endangered forests could inflict widespread ecological damage. "

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0125-02.htm

Gee what a surprise, who would have ever thought that Bush would craft a plan that would help big corporate interests while actually making the problem the plan is allegedly supposed to solve worse?

[Blue_In_AK]

1. Another interesting thing reported last night

is that when ** says he wants to reduce emissions by 20% in 10 years, what he's talking about is 20% of what the projected emissions would be 10 years from now if nothing were done. He wants to make it sound like he meant 20% of what they are now, but that's not his plan at all. His plan is worthless (as usual). Even if emissions were reduced by 20% of what they are today, it's much too little to make a difference.

[Bjorn Against]

4. And of course they can put the projected numbers much higher than actual estimates

And by doing so they can meet their goal while doing absolutely nothing. They do the same thing when they set goals for the budget deficit.

But I don't think he ever said projected so we can not let him try to claim he did. When he says cut it 20% over ten years however it seems clear by the wording that they are talking about cutting it 20% from today's numbers, and if that is not the case then he is straight up lying.

[Blue_In_AK]

5. Call me a cynic, but

my bet would be on "straight up lying."

[sutz12]

2. When the speech was over....

I remember thinking that yes, he mentioned some Liberal issues, but all of his solutions were pure Republican bullshit.

[Vidar]

3. Fucking up--the one thing junior is good at.

[Initech]

6. I love how he didnt refer to it as "global warming"

Jon Stewart did a good job of pointing out that hypocrisy last night.