Monday, May 02, 2005
Pollution...
Hmmmm.....
In Australia, they're opening a cemetery where they bury you standing up. They also bury you in a way that you will completely rot, as opposed to the horizontal carefully preserved stuff normally done. Environmentally, cemetaries do not really take up that much land, it's just not an issue. However, I have always figured that God does not need any particular raw material come resurrection, so why do we bother?
You Have GOT To Be Kidding...
Estimating The Estimates...
So who do you believe?
The greenies win because in that face of insubtantiality they are willing to demonize the opposition.
Cheat Seeking Missles...
Laer and I are in the same business, so I can always count on him for some good info. This past week he had a great post on (yawn) Earth Day and a marvelous quote from T.S. Elliot.
In Australia, they're opening a cemetery where they bury you standing up. They also bury you in a way that you will completely rot, as opposed to the horizontal carefully preserved stuff normally done. Environmentally, cemetaries do not really take up that much land, it's just not an issue. However, I have always figured that God does not need any particular raw material come resurrection, so why do we bother?
You Have GOT To Be Kidding...
The ivory-billed woodpecker, long feared extinct, has been rediscovered inSounds to me like the bird has been doing fine without our help, and now we have to spend "multimillions" involving multiple government agencies?
a remote part of Arkansas some 60 years after the last confirmed U.S. sighting,
bird experts said Thursday. In response, the federal government immediately
announced a plan to save the bird.
"Today we are commiting to a multiagency, multimillion-dollar, multiyear
program to provide hope for this bird's continued survival," Interior Secretary
Gale Norton announced at a news conference.
Estimating The Estimates...
So who do you believe?
An internal Environmental Protection Agency report estimates the Southeast alone could reap up to $2 billion a year in benefits from reducing mercury pollution ? 40 times more than the $50 million in benefits the agency projected publicly for the entire nation.It's not at all possible the methodolgy was bad, or the assumptions were flawed, or the data itself was corrupt, now they withheld information. Please, these risk analysis reports are wild guesses based on presumptive formulations created from incomplete data, complicated by questionable economic modelling. Vegas oddsmakers have better track records than a lot of these risk projections.
Critics said the report shows the Bush administration sought to minimize the benefits of reducing mercury pollution in order to justify not requiring power plant owners to buy the most effective technology for lowering mercury emissions.
The greenies win because in that face of insubtantiality they are willing to demonize the opposition.
Cheat Seeking Missles...
Laer and I are in the same business, so I can always count on him for some good info. This past week he had a great post on (yawn) Earth Day and a marvelous quote from T.S. Elliot.
