Saturday, January 17, 2009

 

Obama and the Democrats' Commitment to Lowering Carbon Emmissions

"The average household would take 57,598 years to produce as much CO2 as Obama's inauguration."

Coincidentally, this is also the length of time it will take our children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, etc to pay off the debt created by the bailout packages.

More.
Team Obama says reducing the carbon-dioxide emissions that result from burning fossil fuels will be a priority, and some careless talk suggests his EPA will eschew carrots for the punitive stick of regulation and taxes. Now the good people over at the Institute for Liberty have punched back with a carbon-footprint estimate for the Obama inauguration itself.

Using data from the EPA, environmentalist organizations, and various news accounts, the group estimates more than 500 million pounds of CO2 will be released during the four-day inaugural festivities. Among the offenders:
  • The 600 private jets expected to fly visitors to and from the event will produce 25,320,000 pounds of CO2.
  • Personal vehicles could account for 262,483,200 pounds of CO2.
  • The horses in the parade will produce more than 400 pounds of CO2.
The slogan for the Obama administration and the Dems is "Sacrifice for thee but not for me."

Comments:
c'mon Dems don't DO inconvenient truths...
 
Hmm.

I reckon those figures also mean that in only one year, 57,598 households produce as much CO2 as the most massive Inaguration in national history.

I guess that means that In-town Atlanta produces that much CO2 what appears to be every two weeks. We won't count the whole metro area.

Maybe lowering that number is what Democrats are talking about, for all the cities and metro areas. Compared to those CO2 numbers, the inaguration's carbon footprint looks remarkably tame. Statistics are fun that way.

Besides, the whole Inagural extravaganza is more for the citizens and history than for the man or the party. A few folks begrudged Bush's inagurations (fiscal responsibility), Clintons inagurations (the economy stupid), etc, etc. But most folks let it go because we expect a certain amount of political theatre as part of our culture. Symbolism is very important in this nation and so is posterity.

People complained about the money and effort spent on rehabilitating the Louisiana Superdome after Katrina, and the grand reopening ceremony as well. But they never looked at the money that stadium made for the city (investment was paid back after the very first Sugar Bowl), or the faces of New Orleanians dealing with the crisis that was 2006. The symbolism of the Dome reopening was like a rebirth of spirit for a people who badly, badly needed one.

Going back to the inaguration extravaganza, Cliff has a good take on it. "I think enough dues were paid for everybody to let go and bask in the moment....
[W]hile he’s speaking you can’t forget the Emancipation Proclamation, the March on Washington, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Think about all the people who sat at lunch counters, marched, and gave their lives just to have a chance to see things like the inauguration.
"
 
Atlanta is a problem! :-)

I understand you point on the inauguraton but at some point all the powerful and rich are going to have to start making meaningful gestures in their own lives. Until they do, why should we believe that they believe their own spiel regarding global warming/climate change?
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]