If democrats take complete control and implement climate change changes, how much will it cost to get green?
Answer:
Better question...how safe will our country be with the way they deal with terrorists?
not as much as it takes to kill a bunch of iraqis.
Starting with the truth would help! Here is an even better movie it has many of the scientists who have their names on the ipcc but actually dropped out and requested their names be removed due to the false information it shares as truth! Check it out and really pay attention it's 73 minutes long and loaded with the truth about the whole matter!
http://stage6.divx.com/user/krahosk/vide...
There are some people who will have additional costs. Mostly these will be people who insist on buying gas-guzzling cars--thereby demonstrating their lack of patriotism (given our dependance on foreign oil) as well as lack of concern about the environment.
Frankly, those types deserve what they get--why should real Americans care about thos who don't care about our country?
Otherwise, the average person is going to beneft financially. What the right-wing is trying so hard to keep people form realizing is that energy-efficiency (whether light bulbs or home insulation or whatever) will pay for itself, saving the individual money. Not to mention the thousands (and soon tens of thousands) of new jbs that are being created by entrepreneurs building new companies and contributing to our economic growth.
New technology, new jobs, cost savings---that'swhat its going to "cost" the average American.
The calculation has been done -- the cost of doing nothing is immensely huger. See link below.
This is not a political issue, it's a survival one.
It will cost a lot to go green..
but it will cost a lot more not too. The effects of runaway global warming on our country, not to mention globally, will be huge.
So go democrats, we need to start taking a new direction before the costs get out of control.
The same as if these Republicans take control:
"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"
"Pat Robertson (very conservative Christian leader) 'It is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air. We really need to do something on fossil fuels.”
Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr. "I believe there is now more than enough evidence of climate change to warrant an immediate and comprehensive - but considered - response. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial."
"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."
James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.
“With overwhelming scientific evidence that global warming is adversely impacting the health of our planet, the time has come for the Congress to take action.”
Senator Olympia Snowe, Republican, Maine
"The overwhelming majority of atmospheric scientists around the world and our own National Academy of Sciences are in essential agreement on the facts of global warming and the significant contribution of human activity to that trend."
Russell E. Train, Republican, former environmental official under Presidents Nixon and Ford
"I agree with you (Gore) that the debate over climate change is over."
Rep. Dennis Hastert, Republican, Illinois
"Global warming is real, now, and it must be addressed."
Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart
"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."
Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona
"I'm trying to learn [about greenhouse gases and global warming]. The more I learn, the bigger believer I become."
Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican, South Carolina
“DuPont believes that action is warranted, not further debate."
Charles O. Holliday, Jr., CEO, DuPont
You've been taken in by a political strategy:
"Rep. Wayne Gilchrest asked to be on the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio refused to allow it unless Gilchrest would say that humans have not contributed to global warming. The Maryland Republican refused and was denied a seat.
Reps. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) and Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.), both research scientists, also were denied seats on the committee. Normally, relevant expertise would be considered an advantage. In this case, it was a disqualification; if the GOP allowed Republican researchers who accept the scientific consensus to sit on a global warming panel, it would kill the party’s strategy of making global warming seem to be the pet obsession of Democrats and Hollywood lefties.
Less than the War in Iraq.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: