2007-11-05 09:16:53 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Global Warming
John Edwards. His plan involves reducing the USA's greenhouse gas emissions 80% by the year 2050. Also good are the plans of Kucinich, Richardson, and Gravel. Unfortunately the candidates with the best shot at winning the nomination - Clinton and Obama - are followers rather than leaders on environmental issues, and their plans are relatively weak.
You can see the candidates' plans as well as interviews with them on environmental issues at the link below.
2007-11-05 10:50:06 · answer #1 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, I am not running right now. None are looking at this as a solution where we are on the verge of controlling earths temp. While we have big problems. Here is what we know: Blacktop (roads and parking lots) and buildings heat cities; Air pollution causes lung (And other) diseases, deforestation (causing more destruction -duststorms, hurricanes/cyclones all increasing deforestation) and destroys the ozone layer while heating earth surface; fires cause mud slides, deforestation and pollution-more heating surface temperatures; CFC's destroy the ozone layer raising skin cancer rates and killing off endanger species and increased surface temperatures; lighting produces ozone near the surface and raises air pollution levels-more heating, the suns increased magnetic field are causing increases in earthquakes (more destruction), volcanoes (wow), sun spots and more heating. Cars, airplanes, ships and most electricity production causes pollution, warmer temperatures and destruction...But most of this is in our control outside of the sun (Volcanoes and earthquakes are part of the sun magnetic strength): We need to fix it! That is why I founded CoolingEarth.org an geoengineering web sight.The Mayor's are on the right track, we can have control and economic growth. The fed gov is way out of step. We also need a pollution surcharge to balance the field and advance new technologies
2007-11-05 22:41:17 · answer #2 · answered by LMurray 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
None of them. Science is split as to whether man is the reason for global warming. There is plenty of evidence that global warming and also global cooling are cyclical. How can any candidate have a good plan when science can't even agree?
2007-11-05 17:26:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Most of the candidates just say Yeah it's important and drop it. The changes needed are not attractive to voters or the corporations who sponsor them.
2007-11-05 17:33:09 · answer #4 · answered by Timothy S 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Even if the next president forced us to walk and shut down all business, the climate would still continue doing what it does.
The Sun is the source for all warmth on this planet. It makes no difference who becomes next president.
2007-11-05 17:34:49 · answer #5 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
They are just waiting to see which way the wind blows.
2007-11-05 18:34:48 · answer #6 · answered by vladoviking 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋