Tuesday, May 12, 2009
In his financial blog, John Mauldin re-posts Peter Huber's article about the factors that circumscribe the carbon debate - fuel, emissions, carbon sinks, and the bottom line. The article concludes with the following:
If we do need to do something serious about carbon, the sequestration of carbon after it's burned is the one approach that accepts the growth of carbon emissions as an inescapable fact of the twenty-first century. And it's the one approach that the rest of the world can embrace, too, here and now, because it begins with improving land use, which can lead directly and quickly to greater prosperity. If, on the other hand, we persist in building green bridges to nowhere, we will make things worse, not better. Good intentions aren't enough. Turned into ineffectual action, they can cost the earth and accelerate its ruin at the same time.
Posted by L Barlow at 12:13 PM