Politics

Out of context: Reply #7964

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 33,772 Responses
  • ukit0

    "The American Clean Energy and Security Act – the bill's official title – would reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and more than 80% by 2050. It would put in place a renewable electricity standard requiring utilities to draw 20% of their power from renewables by 2020. It would also raise efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, and invest $190bn in energy-saving technology by 2025."

    Are those of you criticizing this seriously saying we can't reduce greenhouse gases by 17% in the next 10 years? That's doesn't sound unreasonable to me at all.

    • At what cost? And why do we need to do this RIGHT NOW DO IT DO IT when this bill is basically just a huge tax...tommyo
    • huge tax + recession = oh great I'm glad we can reduce some green house gasses but what the fuck am I going to eat?tommyo
    • All it is is a power grab folks. Same thing we got for the last 8 years, well, we're getting it again in a different package.tommyo
    • You'll live, the sky isn't falling.DrBombay
    • HAHA I doubt you're going to starve to death dude - again, this is a slow change.ukit
    • If the 17% reduction happened this year or next, you would have more of a pointukit
    • And by the way, the cost of not reducing emissions...will ultimately be much higherukit
    • I didn't really mean myself as far as 'what the fuck am I going to eat,' my family has a restaurant chain, I'll be fine. :)tommyo

View thread