CARBON NEUTRAL & THE HOTTEST FROM THE "AGE-DOT"

Object & Food for Thought:

"This survey, [the Economist's recent contribution to the Climate Change Debate] which generated about 118 tonnes of carbon dioxide from flights, car journeys, paper production, printing and distribution, has been carbon-neutralised through the Carbon Neutral Company. The cost was £590; the money was spent on capturing methane from an American mine." from The Economist, Sept. 7th 2006

Conclusion -Commentary:
I'll start my comment by applying my own advice to readers of this "The Economist" report, free introduction on the Climate Change Debate. Start with the conclusion, start at the bottom of the page (cf. above for ease of study).

There (cf.above) you will find some data on their Carbon Neutral Approach: Carbon Costs of this specific activity(Climate Dossier) and the monetary cost of mitigation £590.

If such activity costs so little to mitigate (roughly the lowest salary rate-could there a Zero or Two..missing?) if not why so much squabbling over policy? Or is there nothing here upon which to base an economy, and hence provide useful, meaningful,worthwhile jobs, and not just provide employment, stagnation?



Blog -Comments in full:

I did not mean to blog today,as you may see from the rest of these pages there is much page,links,lay-out cleaning-up (optimisation?) to be done. Add to this considerable paper reading material & renewed access to professional online journals, about 20 peer-reviewed journals via the Institute of (Metallurgy)Materials,Minerals and Mining to be specific. Even broader scientific news arrived on my desk from the EU-RTD (European Union-Research & Technical Development) Lads.

However,probably motivated by the radio news reporting the Hottest year it history or something (dot-age or age-dot?). I'll check the reference. There will no doubt,& fortunately so-trust a canney,concerned Scot- be good coverage of these events. One liveable planet, n'est ce pas, some liveable countries still!

I ran through some Webzine Alerts, noteably The Economist, who feature a full report on Climate Change & Free intoduction to their report 7 Sept.O6, which I am commenting on now.
I'll start my comment by applying my own advice to readers of this "The Economist" report, free introduction on the Climate debate.

Start with the conclusion. Start at the bottom of the page. There, cf.above, you will find some data on their Carbon Neutral Approach: Carbon Costs of this specific activity(Climate Dossier) and the monetary cost of mitigation.

If such activity costs so little to mitigate (roughly the lowest salary rate here & Twice minimun subsistance re-insertion rate) why so much squabbling over policy? Or is there nothing here upon which to base an economy and hence provide useful jobs, meaningful,worthwhile jobs, and not just provide employment, stagnation, stagflation?

Naturally the introduction is well written, comes to some extent after the main Climate Change Frontline "Storm(s)": IPCC-Intergoverment Panel on Climate Change 2001 building up "Steam" & Other Gases 2004-5. Economy(ies) "oblige"? The Economist although proud of it's radical tradition, attempts to remain balanced.

NB. The Economist Article was written before the Royal Society Petitioning Letter "accusing" Exxon-Mobile of biased & excessive funding to discredit good, often exellent, scientific work and conclusions on Climate Change, last week, I believe. It was also written before weekend 24-5 Sept.06 reports of Al Gore asking and being heard by (adequation) Sir Richard Branson to help by investing in Business(es) Fighting Global Warming or better expressed Fighting to Master Global Climate Change (& foreseeable Disasters?).
Post Add-on 061003: Critics have raised doutes as to the quality of R.Bransons response as "rapid scribling" on the back of [coffin nail] packet during a train journey, latter at least being more environmentally friendly reference than the equivalent (carbon) car journey!

PS. This Blog has generated almost no CO2 emmisions other than those shared by all PC, users, in particular the "no-printer-paper-ink office"s, dear to Bill Gates, who of course, can afford to annoy one or two big industrial outfits and their lobbyists.

If YOU READ THIS FAR YOU WILL FIND YOUR Patience Rewarded at Ecobusiness