Global warming changes bad for the US?

Question

How can instituting any of the following changes possibly adversely effect the US?
Reduce oil and fuel consumption in our homes and cars.
Reduce traffic on the road by car pooling.
Reduce cars on the road by replacing them with bikes and scooters.
Recycle everything that can be.
Use less energy in our homes, lights, electronics.
Waste less water, plant more natural ground cover (strawberries for example) instead of grass.
Stop cutting down forests and instead create tree farms.
Restore old lands and structures instead of developing new ones.
Lessen the urban sprawl and build higher structures.
Eliminate inefficient street lighting and install efficient and subdued street lighting (hooded, pointing toward the ground)
Plant and harvest our own gardens and crops.
Establish more preserved wildlife parks (widen boundaries and create new ones).
Create incentives for every home to use Solar energy and wind power.
*I want honest and thought out answers* - Do not troll.

Answer 1

I totally agree with you. There is no way that conserving and reducing waste can possibly be bad for the Earth, living creatures and plants.

I would say that the government should require businesses that have parking lots to build garages if they will have more than one hundred cars parked in their lot. That would greatly reduce the sprawl of malls and even the local shopping centers. It would also reduce the amount of land a business would have to buy to build on, which would in the end increase their profits by reducing property taxes.

Gary said that the suits would lose money, but in fact they will do exactly the opposite. Most companies do not look at the savings in paper costs by not printing every document and the reduced mail cost by using email. They also do not count the reduced energy costs by efficiencies. It was corporations that first converted to fluorescent lights because they use less energy.

Take care,
Troy

Answer 2

The short answer: our lifestyles will be so much better but the economy won't look as good. Why is that? Take for example growing your own vegetables. If you had bought them, the transaction would be part of the sales reported by your local supermarket, which would ultimately be reflected in the state's Gross Product, and then in National GNP figures. But if you (and many others like you) were to grow and eat their own home-grown vegetables, your health might be better but the GNP would be the loser, since the only transactions that would show up (if any) would be the price of the seeds.

But never fear: as you know, our society is enamored with consumer spending. So you can be sure that there will be plenty of ads, etc. to make sure that the "savings" you and others like you achieve by eating home grown food will be amply made up by your spending in garden implements, powered rototillers, fertilizers, pesticides, mulch, videos and magazine subscriptions on gardening and cooking, canning supplies, plus the new 600sq. ft kitchens with a $2,500 Jenn-stove with which to do the canning, Hence the strength of the American economy.

Answer 3

Trees cause methane, too, you know. And technology IS reaching for greater efficiency already. This planet recycles water anyway, in case you didn't know.

I think it's NUTS that Liberals are yelling about GW, when there's plenty of evidence for BOTH sides. Why spend all that energy crying wolf when you don't need to? It just makes economic sense to go green. Personally, I'm delighted when gas goes over $3.65, because at that point, people actually LOOK at the alternatives around them. WHY are we supporting Big Oil, Big Government, and Big Terror?

Awhile back, I asked for a 'free' copy of the Quran online. To my surprise, I received a HUGE, beautiful, fully illuminated book that was almost too beautiful to open up! That book cost $200 if it cost a penny! And WHERE do you suppose the funding for free books like that comes from??? That's right! Saudi Oil Dollars. And guess who ELSE gets funded with that kind of money floating around in the Middle East???????

To heck with Global Warming and Liberals crying WOLF! Let's be efficient and eco friendly because it's the SMART thing to do!

Answer 4

Of course these are all good ideas. What is sad is that we all knew this quite well at least 30 years ago....Carter tried to get all this started and they laughed at him. Ford had a plan for complete energy independence within 10 years. All were voted out in favor of the nightmare Reagan years of "morning in America"...which brought us SUVs and a hugely unfortunate delay in getting started on all of this.
Thanks for your list!
But...global warming has a huge momentum and some will happen anyway. In fact, the rate of CO2 increase is 3 times worse now (reported in today's paper) than anyone had thought.....meaning our latest predictions will be more on the side of the worst global warming changes. Crops now grown in the U.S. will shift up to Canada; coastal areas may flood (say goodby to New Orleans for good and Florida). The impacts will not be trivial. Your ideas will help to make sure those worst case scenarios might not happen. Now we need to get China and the rest of the world to buy in!

Answer 5

Those are all good ideas. Many of those things are already being done. But some are impractical and some are impossible. Limiting development in particular is impossible as long as the population is growing. If there are more people then we need more houses, more farm land, more schools, more factories, more shops and so on.

Answer 6

I think all of those ideas are good. I just don't want the government to tell me or anyone we HAVE to do those things or else.
I don't want more taxes to pay for it either. Use some of the money you would have paid implementing those programs to advertise and convince people they should do those things on their own.
That's the only way to really make a lasting change in the peoples behavior.

Answer 7

The answer to CampbellP's concern about providing for more people is contained in his question: population control is necessary too, otherwise all the reforms in the world will only delay the inevitable. Those who still insist on having large families can all move to Vatican City with them, where I'm certain that "God will provide."

Answer 8

The next age of man is coming. Your ideas are right and they actually will increase GDP and create more jobs. The jobs will be in both research and in development of the fields you dicuss. Nice question. The adverse effects are non-existant please post your ideas in response to Nancy Pelosi's important question. Your ideas have stong merit.

Answer 9

It would increase jobs and help our country, it would also mean our poor government has to admit they've fired people who tried to speak these truths and denied that it's real for years.

Answer 10

Dream on my friend...the blue suits can't make enough money doing everything efficiently...