There is only one way to save the environment, and it isn't going to happen at Copenhagen.

[Meldread]

Honestly, more regulation isn't going to stop environmental damage. We're never going to get all nations to agree on anything, but assuming that we do we still have to watch people drag their feet. Then there are enforcement issues to deal with. By the time all the issues are solved we might as well all be dead anyway.

There is one simple thing people ignore: those with the gold make the rules. Businesses that pollute and are profitable will pay lobbyists, which will ultimately get regulations watered down, or they will pay off regulators to look the other way. If you look hard enough, and more importantly - if you have the cash - you'll find an ally somewhere in any government.

To make matters worse, the biggest polluter is the United States government itself. It's easy to wag your finger at those mean, nasty businesses that don't care about the environment, it's another thing entirely to look in the mirror. Accepting responsibility isn't something governments are known for... and so, there is only one solution to the problem.

End environmental regulation. Why? Because it allows polluters something to hide behind. If a chemical company contaminates your water, they can easily turn to the EPA and say; "But look we were following all the regulations set down by the government! It's their fault for not having better regulations; we just can't afford to do this without them as our competitors won't comply!"

Meanwhile, they go behind our backs, run to the government and water down the regulation to suit their needs and profits.

Instead of regulation, it'd be replaced with a simple system. If provable damage is done to a person(s) or property, they can take you to court and sue your pants off.

This means if you're putting CO2 in the atmosphere and causing Global Warming, and this is provable in a Court of Law, and it is further provable that it will have an adverse effect upon you... then you win. You get money. Lots of money. And that money keeps coming until they fix it.

What is the result of this? Effective cap and trade. You pollute; then pay up. It creates an incentive to develop new technologies that eliminates pollution all together (such as carbon capture), it raises prices of old dirty technology, and that in turn puts it on an equal playing field with clean and renewable technology (wind and solar for example); which cost more in the short term to get set up.

Dealing with government pollution though... thats a more difficult matter. It isn't as simple as stripping away their ability to claim something like Sovereign Immunity, because ultimately it's somewhat irrelevant. Change in a government doesn't come from economic pressures, the way it does for a business, but instead is entirely political. Any payment given to people which is a result of government pollution will ultimately come from the very people the government is paying!

The easiest and most simple method is to force the government to privatize areas in which it pollutes. If that cannot or should not be done, then the government must be forced to cease whatever it is doing until new technology is developed to circumvent their pollution. A zero tolerance policy would need to be developed.

Unfortunately, in the end, no matter what happens it's going to come from political pressure to get the ball rolling. However, the only way to save the environment is to do what I have outlined above, because ultimately so long as government allows business to hide behind it's skirt business will do so. When you remove that shield of protection, and make them directly accountable to the people, it will -force- change upon them.