Re: E-M:/ Global warming on the cheap

[Gary Stock <gstock@net-link.net>]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Gary Stock <gstock@net-link.net>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Also new today, _more_ proof that our budget priorities are not only
contrary to our survival interests, they're actually contrary to our
_economic_ interests:


   http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2006/10/30/afx3128658.html

   LONDON (AFX) - Failure to combat climate change now could result
   in a global recession that could wipe 20 pct off GDP or 3.68 trln
   stg, according to a government-commissioned report to be published 
   today. 

   The Stern review, which has looked at the economic impact of global
   warming, calls for an immediate spend of 1 pct of the world's GDP
   to tackle the problem... 


Similar analyses over the past twenty years have fallen on deaf ears. 
Perhaps the phrase "global recession" or "wipe 20 percent off GDP" will
catch _someone's_ attention!

GS


> David Holtz wrote:
> 
> This story I read over morning coffee today is one of the most
> disturbing for me in awhile because it hits in the head and the gut.
> Intellectually, our country's budget priorities seemed destined to
> sink our children's futures unless dramatically reversed.
> Emotionally, the news reports on the daily carnage from Iraq--which
> already choke my spirit--have a new dimension. Our global future may
> decline tomorrow and people are dying today because of our misplaced
> priorities that favor military spending over our real national
> security needs for energy independence.  --David
> 
> In Today's New York Times:
> Budgets Falling In Race to Race to Fight Global Warming
> In the United States, annual federal spending for all energy research
> and development ? not just the research aimed at climate-friendly
> technologies ? is less than half what it was a quarter-century ago. It
> has sunk to $3 billion a year in the current budget from an
> inflation-adjusted peak of $7.7 billion in 1979, according to several
> different studies.
> 
> Federal spending on medical research, by contrast, has nearly
> quadrupled, to $28 billion annually, since 1979. Military research has
> increased 260 percent, and at more than $75 billion a year is 20 times
> the amount spent on energy research.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Stock                                        gstock@unblinking.com
UnBlinking                                   http://www.unblinking.com/
Googlewhack                                 http://www.googlewhack.com/

     The best proof for a claim that terrorists are crazy or evil
     would be to acknowledge that the White House is full of them

==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================