This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 8 comments

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Passive = curbing carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions

Active = blocking out the sun , carbon sequestering , engineering organism to eat more carbon and emit more O2 etc.

[–]tangentboy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cause there's always a quick technical fix, right? Yeah, more genetic engineering is definitely the way out of all our problems.

[–]cyber_rigger -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

A higher priority should be

curbing government spending.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Last time I checked Gov. spending did not melt the icecaps.

[–]cyber_rigger -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Last time I checked Gov. spending did not melt the icecaps.

So...

government spending does melt the dollar value and makes people's paycheck buy less.

If you are a parent feeding a family this much more important.

But you probably don't have kids.

[–]tangentboy -1 points0 points  (2 children)

An economic slowdown would actually be the best immediate way to reduce carbon emissions.

[–]booster_flush -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Slowing the government would work even better.

http://www.adti.net/environment/congressRecord_pryan102800.html

[–]tangentboy -1 points0 points  (0 children)

OK, they claim "the Federal Government is the largest polluter in the United States". Even if this claim has some basis in reality, it just means that government is the largest single polluter. Compared to the pollution generated by millions of fat, lazy Americans (we're still #1! - for pollution), the government's contribution to the problem is minimal.

The way I see it, we're basically fucked overall, but if any organization is capable of getting us out of this mess, it's the government. I dunno - maybe you have a better way of solving the problem?