 |
 |
The biggest problem with these 'documentaries' - pro or anti anthropogenic C02 based global warming - is they always manage to leave out one key factor that would criticise their case. The C4 documentary left out the cooling effect of atmospheric sulphur, which might have explained the global cooling 1940-70, just as CO2 levels were rising, as many of us were burining dirtier coal without filters then in power stations Meanwhile, the anthropogenic CO2 lot never mention variable solar activity and clouds. So we the public are left wondering if we really should be paying Green taxes and £1 a litre for petrol, OR is it some surveillance based, do-down-developing-world-economy, mobility limiting swindle foisted on us by those 'in the know' - if indeed there are any such people. I would tend to err on caution as the penalties for being wrong if it really is C02 are a lot worse than being wrong if it really is the variable sun - a roasted planet versus a bit of missed economic growth. But I think the general public would be a lot more convinced on the sensibleness of caution with C02 emissions if the had more Green carrots, less Green sticks. By imposing far too many Green-based costs on the public, many fewer Green-based grants to them, to promote a greener way of life, we make a Green lifestyle more expensive, less affordable, and any economist will tell you that reduces demand for 'Green-ness', raises demand for the old 'dirty' polluting way of life. Ask Gordon Brown, I believe, maybe erroneously, that he's some kind of economist? Dr Hillary J. Shaw Business Management and Marketing Group Harper Adams University College Shrewsbury Road Newport, Shropshire TF10 8NB _www.fooddeserts.org_ (http://www.fooddeserts.org/)