What is Digg?165 Comments
- kingpincwh, on 12/06/2007, -8/+63hey hey, a war that can be won! The war on carbon dioxide emissions
- Rioracer916, on 12/06/2007, -0/+50This is what happens when there are tighter lobbying regulations. Instead of spending billions on people who hate us and don't want us interfering with their lives; Germany has decided to spend that money on the people who actually earned it in the first place, the German citizen.
What a concept! - mrdeathgod, on 12/06/2007, -1/+42Actually, I think they're dropping to 36% below *current* levels, which will take them below 1990 levels.
"The German cabinet agreed to a 36% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, below 1990 levels, by 2020 through improvements in energy efficiency, better building insulation and investments in new renewable energy sources."
Regardless though, it's a noteworthy undertaking. - Dinosaur88, on 12/06/2007, -1/+27I'm actually learning about this in a class. Germany is using solar cells as a major contributor to renewable energy. They already set up massive panels along the road side of the autobahn. They also offer programs to offset the huge cost of the cells so that everyday people can hope to purchase them. Farmers in Germany are buying these cells and setting them up on a plot of land that they own. Then they pump the energy back into the power grid that they receive from the cells and earn money from it. Although it isn't a lot of money once you factor the cost of the solar cells they make enough to get by or even just have very low energy bills.
If our governmet did this, we would probably be seeing a lot more cells on top of peoples roofs. - sockpuppets, on 12/06/2007, -0/+25Little furry terrorists!
- Po0py, on 12/06/2007, -3/+27Well done, Germany.
- BossKey, on 12/06/2007, -0/+23Germany: Invest tax dollars in the homeland
USA: Watch tax dollars disappear into the distant desert sands of Iraq and Afghanistan - BossKey, on 12/06/2007, -2/+24Which means we have more resources, more technology...and more responsibility.
You bring up a good point! - PhilMoskowitz, on 12/06/2007, -5/+21you understand ratios there knucklehead? christ sakes.. I hear this dullardry from people bitching about universal health care. STOP BEING STUPID
- bmalnad, on 12/06/2007, -1/+17I was in Germany for a few weeks this summer. Solar is getting popular, but wind turbines are far more visible. They are everywhere in Germany. From almost anywhere on the autobahn, you can see at least two or three wind turbines. Very cool.
- FloppyLlamaDigg, on 12/06/2007, -1/+16Wait, wait, wait.. people actually believe that if we leave Iraq, ISLAMO-FASCISM(TM)!!!!! will take over the planet?
- Pie4Weebl, on 12/06/2007, -1/+15"China is warming to the idea of binding emissions reductions, according to The Australian Financial Review" Dugg for that word choice.
- br0ck, on 12/06/2007, -1/+15Maybe you're joking, but just in case.. respiration is already at an equilibrium in nature and it uses non-sequestered CO2. Burning oil and coal releases billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere that have been locked away in the Earth's crust for millions of years.
- goerg, on 12/06/2007, -3/+15and this without bringing thousands of innocent people to jail...
- Grumps, on 12/06/2007, -4/+15If Germans could think, why cant we? :(
- inactive, on 12/06/2007, -1/+12This is why we can't allow our national priorities to be set by corporate leaders of industries acting mostly in their own self interest. As Greenspan said in his book, the war in Iraq, is mostly to do with oil. Our presence in the middle east, is mostly to do with oil.
It's time to redirect our priorities away from the influence of groups and individuals acting mostly in their own interest and consider more sustainable methods of energy creation. - TypeEE, on 12/06/2007, -1/+11However, the US is paying for the price of war plus pollution, that is like a double mortgage.
- nblsavage, on 12/06/2007, -1/+11I'll make it simple for you. Money spent (wasted) on the war could be better spent elsewhere.
- fuzed, on 12/06/2007, -1/+10...and it would still be worth every penny.
- warriorscot, on 12/06/2007, -0/+9That should make it much easier for you, some of the biggest obstacles in Europe is that these projects take much more space than conventional systems and we have a far higher population density you guys have ***** loads of empty space and because you pay tiny amounts in tax you should all be able to afford these things without government handouts.
- zengonzo, on 12/06/2007, -1/+10Inside of our own borders? Without a doubt.
- Andareed, on 12/06/2007, -0/+8@p0s3r: It's called equilibrium.
- Dinosaur88, on 12/06/2007, -0/+8my mistake not the autobahn but certainly roadside. Guess i fell asleep during that part of the class.
Article:
http://www.tve.org/earthreport/archive/doc.cfm?aid ...
for the image :
http://www.tve.org/images/janus/uploaded/Payback_r ... - ropers, on 12/06/2007, -1/+9As a German, I found the comparison quite striking.
You're using your money to kill hundreds of thousands of people (or about a million, depending on which scientific study you prefer).
We're using the money to save the planet.
Gosh, didn't it use to be the other way around?
(Well, not really, because despite what your teacher told you, the Soviets, not the US, defeated Hitler, but I grant you that point here, because it makes for a better punch line.) - inactive, on 12/06/2007, -0/+7I heard it on Fox News
- justbloggin, on 12/06/2007, -1/+8Wow! I guess facts don't come into play at all for some people. Denial indeed runs deep.
- bulkhater, on 12/06/2007, -0/+7And we have a WHOLE lot of land to install wind turbines and solar panels.
- inactive, on 12/06/2007, -0/+7I think he was talking about that short Austrian fellow's penchant for slaughtering Jews
- Azio, on 12/06/2007, -1/+7Sustainable, green technologies will ultimately be cheaper than carbon-based energy. If Western countries blaze a trail and introduce the world to sustainable energy then China and India will quickly follow -- and likely be more than happy to buy those innovative green technologies.
- byronm, on 12/06/2007, -0/+7Wow, i guess stupidity does prevail!
- erkokite, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ ...
- Mengoxon, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6You mean, you don't get it.
- dbs1221, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6Maybe your argument would be more valid if that was the reasoning behind war and forced regime change, it wasn't so its null, and Saddam isn't there torturing the Kurds anymore so by your reasoning we should stop spending money there and leave.
- ropers, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6Too much TV. And the wrong kind of TV news. Compare:
http://www.tagesschau.de/
http://www.foxnews.com/ - BossKey, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6Your point is valid that the invasion of Afghanistan could be justified.
But I will stick to the idea that the fate of Afghanistan was tied to our invasion of Iraq. If we had not invaded Iraq, we probably could have done a much better job in Afghanistan, instead of having to presently live with the shame of those record opium harvests and the continuing failure to locate Osama Bin Laden after all these years. The diversion of resources into Iraq is helping us fail in Afghanistan, unfortunately. - PhantomRogue, on 12/06/2007, -0/+6I believe he was referring to another type of gas.
- synthpop, on 12/06/2007, -1/+6nobody ever got rich from reducing national carbon dioxide emissions. war on the other hand...
- Syric, on 12/06/2007, -0/+5Who says solar panels are ugly?
- BossKey, on 12/06/2007, -1/+6Yes. The US government should stop threatening the rights of its own citizens and its own use of torture in general.
...another good point...thank you, you guys are really contributing to this discussion! - Dinosaur88, on 12/06/2007, -0/+5have any idea what the offset of having nuclear is? How do you suppose we store the spent nuclear cells? On top of that the potential for harm if a reactor fails isn't what i call "clean". Our UC energy manager said something along the lines of "the cleanest energy is the energy that was never used."
- scrambled, on 12/06/2007, -0/+5This is where our money should be invested. A new, renewable fuel source is the answer to all of our problems. We'll win the war on terrorism if we stop giving billions of dollars to unstable religious psychopaths and, more importantly, start to undo the damage we've done to our own planet.
- vikingcoder, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4The carbon dioxide in human, and all other, breath was taken out of the atmosphere by plants through photosynthesis - whether you eat the plants directly or animals that eat the plants. Thus, there is a closed loop, with no net addition to the atmosphere.
- ZenMojo, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4But then the oil companies would go under, and they would never let that happen. In fact, this is why we can't trust this sort of thing to private business, they're too heavily invested in obsolete technology to make huge shifts.
- justbloggin, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4The problem is that the government IS involved, in corporate welfare, subdizing the oil and auto industry that does not want to change. Not too mention those nice campaign donations....and the China excuse just doesn't fly. Everybody needs to cleanup their side of the street.
- inactive, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4"The plan is forecast to cost Germany, Europe's top polluter, $45.5 billion or about what the U.S. spends on the Iraq war every seven months."
Yeah, and the Iraq war was forecast to cost nothing. - superyounan1, on 12/06/2007, -1/+5Just imagine how many things can be improved in our society with just 1 day's worth of Iraq war spending - or what about the entire damn war! How many problems could have been solved? How many lives saved? How many diseases fought?
- inactive, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4Oh, I missed the sarcasm.
- amnezia22, on 12/06/2007, -0/+4erm..because you spent all you money on the Iraq war
- ropers, on 12/06/2007, -1/+4What part of "excess mortality" don't you understand?
Had the US refrained from illegally invading Iraq, about ONE MILLION LESS Iraqis would have died. That's a scientifically established fact. Google for Lancet reports and ORB.
Your argument would fall down with only a single excess Iraqi death. But there isn't one. There are one million. Caused by you and your vote. You, Sir, are a Schreibtischtaeter. Look it up. - dummersack, on 12/06/2007, -0/+3i always thought that your tax money goes to your big military industry and so also stays in your land
-
Show 51 - 100 of 165 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 