Two: I wonder what could be so bloody bad about a global civilization that reduced its CO2 emissions. Leaving out the greenhouse gas issue entirely: the other products of combustion that accompany the CO2 have a proven deleterious effect on people's health, at ground level. Reducing combustion generally by adding nukes, wind and solar to the power grid, while increasing electricity use in transportation, cannot be bad in and of itself. Can it, JimO?

The last vehicle I purchased for transportation was in 1994. Since then, it has been my only vehicle. The current odometer reading on that vehicle is 49,309 miles - not 149,309 - 49,309.

If everyone drove like I do, gas would still be $.50 a gallon.

Would you choose to live like that?

What, then, is to be feared about the rule of leaders who want to make the air cleaner, even if their reasons may be seen -- in a century or so -- as exaggerated?

How would you like to be *taxed* into living like that?

I apologize for calling you out. The point I'm trying to make is the issue is at least as personal as it is political.

I found this Slate article on point with JimO's comments...

Pugs