Monday, July 20, 2009
Demand that Government Not Push a Cure Which Causes More Harm Than Good
As I've repeatedly written, no matter what you think about global warming, you should demand that the government not effect a cure which is worse than the disease. See this and this.
Indeed, as the Washington Post writes today, the government forced a switch from one type of chemical to another because it was believed the first was enlarging the ozone hole. However, according to the Post, the chemical which the government demanded be used instead is 4,470 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
So for goodness sakes, whatever you think about global warming, demand that government not effect a cure which will cause more harm than good.
1 comment:
→ Thank you for contributing to the conversation by commenting. We try to read all of the comments (but don't always have the time).
→ If you write a long comment, please use paragraph breaks. Otherwise, no one will read it. Many people still won't read it, so shorter is usually better (but it's your choice).
→ The following types of comments will be deleted if we happen to see them:
-- Comments that criticize any class of people as a whole, especially when based on an attribute they don't have control over
-- Comments that explicitly call for violence
→ Because we do not read all of the comments, I am not responsible for any unlawful or distasteful comments.
Posts
The article does not mention the fact that the chemicals HFCs replace (CFCs), are also powerful greenhouse gases. It is probably a wash as far as greenhouse effect. Back during the 60's and 70's CFCs were used as propellants in aerosol cans. Current emissions of HFCs are minuscule compared to that. A better solution would have been to use ammonia as a refrigerant, as it was before the advent of CFC's.
ReplyDelete