Kayven Riese asked:
what do U mean, MISLEADING?? horse patoot! the facts r that USA is way
on top PER CAPITA as well as total greenhouse producer..
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Mr. Wade wrote:
Kayven Riese wrote:
and some *#&@*&ers think it is necessary to drain the #(_at_)*@&#
planet dry of oil as #(_at_)*&#ing quickly as possible.
Not only is this entire thread off-topic as it is, but this comment
is a complete non sequitur (as well as misleading.) What does this
have to do with anything?
1. Please don't "Cc:" me on list posts, since I then have to download
2. Since this is ridiculously off-topic, this will be my last post
regarding this matter to this list.
3. I'll assume it's true that the USA is the largest user of petroleum
products per capita, as well as leading in "greenhouse" gas
a. What I found to be "misleading" is that Kayven's comment seemed to
imply that we are in danger of actually soon depleting the world's
petroleum, which is rather absurd. The amount of oil available is
astounding. We won't deplete it any time in the foreseeable
b. US consumers, as well as consumers elsewhere, pay quite well for
the resources they consume. (I know I surely do!) Since they pay
for it, they are surely entitled to use it as they see fit.
c. While the US may lead the world in per capita petroleum
consumption, let's not forget that it also leads the world in per
capita food production. The US is second only to China in grain
production, with a significantly smaller population. (Third is
India, again with a population far in excess of the US.) The US
produces approximately 1/6 of the world's grain harvest and
exports more grain than any other nation, approximately 5% of the
world's production, most of which goes to European countries and
Japan for animal feed use; the other nations apparently want it,
since they purchase the products.
Before one condemns anyone (or any group) for consumption, one might
well consider the various circumstances encompassing the situation,
as well as for what the resources are being used.
This is, of course, related to the the Kyoto Accords. Sadly, too
many people are convinced that these accords are about climate
preservation and environmentalism, while the truth is that they are
really about penalizing 37 successful industrial economies'
industries, while exempting others. The truth is that Kyoto is too
expensive, probably would actually HARM the environment, and is
irrelevant anyway, since we cannot anticipate future technologies.
Again, this is so far off-topic, be advised: I shall not reply to any
further messages in this thread.
-- Mr. Wade
Linux: The Choice of the GNU Generation
procmail mailing list