Some crazy woman named Maude Barlow (or something) was quoted in this past Monday's Metro newspaper as saying that we should ban commercial sale of water
in Canada. Apparently selling water to the U.S. and other drought-stricken lands of friends around the world is immoral or something.
Is that woman on medication? Maybe she ought to be. Apparently the only people in her warped view who have a RIGHT to water are those who are dying. Not the able-minded and able-bodied people who are capable of harvesting the abundant supplies of water from our Frozen North, nor those who build and run de-salination plants to make use of the enormous percentage of the Earth's surface that is covered by salt water.
It's the new communism - from each according to ability, to each according to need. If you need water, as in you're dying, you have a right to it. If you are in good health, you don't have a right to it.
What about "zero footprint"? What is the real meaning of that vile phrase? - Make no impact, leave no trace - be a zero. A nothing. The whole thing is sickening.
Humans are a part of the food chain on this planet. Our carbon "output" is food for planets, which are responsible for making the oxygen we depend on. If we stop producing our end of the bargain, other things also slow down.
Dealing with climate change means looking to technology, not away from it as Ms Maude the Fraud suggested. (She's apparently the recipient of some award by some group for her efforts to ruin, er, "save" the environment.) Technology is so the answer. Working out how to maximize the piles of "raw materials" that our garbage represents is in technology's wheelhouse. What looks like garbage to each of us, when put together, is a cheaper means to have a ready source of tin, aluminum, and other materials that once upon a time had to be mined out of the earth.
What we need is the ability to produce a great deal more energy in a much cleaner and safer manner. The best source I've seen developed so far is nuclear energy. Harnessing atomic energy is the direction in which to head. Fossil fuels, coal, even natural gas - these sources of energy got us here. Maybe one day wind and solar will be able to deliver the payload per square foot of land needed for infrastructure (and that day will come when the dangers are reduced. I refer to the dangers inherent in occupying greater physical space with equipment that needs construction repair and maintenance which activity puts human workers at risk of injury and death due to falls!) However, when it comes to energy - it would go a long way to finding even better methods of delivering the upper-range of our energy needs, without asking people to "conserve" and cut back, but instead inform themselves on the true nature of each kind of source and the risk that attaches (and the costs) and be free to choose for themselves.
Securing a future for ourselves and our children (and so on) - that's what a lot of politicians talk about, and many regular citizens too for that matter. We today will not be doing the future any favors by waiting to start the process of securing freedom. Rather than re-explore the dead-end that is communism via the environmentalist platform, I say it is time to support individual rights.
Is that woman on medication? Maybe she ought to be. Apparently the only people in her warped view who have a RIGHT to water are those who are dying. Not the able-minded and able-bodied people who are capable of harvesting the abundant supplies of water from our Frozen North, nor those who build and run de-salination plants to make use of the enormous percentage of the Earth's surface that is covered by salt water.
It's the new communism - from each according to ability, to each according to need. If you need water, as in you're dying, you have a right to it. If you are in good health, you don't have a right to it.
What about "zero footprint"? What is the real meaning of that vile phrase? - Make no impact, leave no trace - be a zero. A nothing. The whole thing is sickening.
Humans are a part of the food chain on this planet. Our carbon "output" is food for planets, which are responsible for making the oxygen we depend on. If we stop producing our end of the bargain, other things also slow down.
Dealing with climate change means looking to technology, not away from it as Ms Maude the Fraud suggested. (She's apparently the recipient of some award by some group for her efforts to ruin, er, "save" the environment.) Technology is so the answer. Working out how to maximize the piles of "raw materials" that our garbage represents is in technology's wheelhouse. What looks like garbage to each of us, when put together, is a cheaper means to have a ready source of tin, aluminum, and other materials that once upon a time had to be mined out of the earth.
What we need is the ability to produce a great deal more energy in a much cleaner and safer manner. The best source I've seen developed so far is nuclear energy. Harnessing atomic energy is the direction in which to head. Fossil fuels, coal, even natural gas - these sources of energy got us here. Maybe one day wind and solar will be able to deliver the payload per square foot of land needed for infrastructure (and that day will come when the dangers are reduced. I refer to the dangers inherent in occupying greater physical space with equipment that needs construction repair and maintenance which activity puts human workers at risk of injury and death due to falls!) However, when it comes to energy - it would go a long way to finding even better methods of delivering the upper-range of our energy needs, without asking people to "conserve" and cut back, but instead inform themselves on the true nature of each kind of source and the risk that attaches (and the costs) and be free to choose for themselves.
Securing a future for ourselves and our children (and so on) - that's what a lot of politicians talk about, and many regular citizens too for that matter. We today will not be doing the future any favors by waiting to start the process of securing freedom. Rather than re-explore the dead-end that is communism via the environmentalist platform, I say it is time to support individual rights.
How you keeping?
