Didn't GM make the EV1 and pull it off the market in 2003?
Yeap, GM released the EV1 then took it off the market, in as you say 2003. Unfortunately it was only available in Arizona and California to the public. And even then it wasn't sold, it was only rented.
the Toyota hybrid system will run on electric power only
"The Atlantic magazine issue I'm reading now is wrong then. This is what it says:
"Because it will have both an electric and a gasoline motor on board, the Volt will be a hybrid. But it will be like no hybrid on the road today. Existing hybrids are gasoline-powered cars, with an electric assist to improve the gas mileage. The Volt will be an electric-powered car, with a gasoline assist to increase the battery's range."
Hydroelectric power requires destroying ecosystems? All of the time? News to me.
Hydroelectric does destroy ecosystems, but they don't have to. The Three Gorges Dam in China will flood a lot of land. And to build it the Chinese are forcibly relocating millions of people. With the forests drowned, the rotting trees will produce methane, a greenhouse gas more than 20 tymes more potent than CO2. On top of that studies have shown that dams don't bring all the benefits they were sold as providing. The Epupa Damin Namibia is a good case study on this. The Tucuruí Dam in the Brazilian Amazon shows some things that can go wrong. In the US the Colorado River is an excellent case on the effects of dams. Whereas the river used to empty out into the Gulf of California or Sea of Cortez the water no longer reaches there. Instead dams were built along it to supply water to Nevada and Southern California, desert areas. Unfortunately lakes created by the dams, such as Lake Powell, allow more water to evaporate than what would without those dams. Larger surface areas allow more evaporation.
Sometime ago there was an article posted on/. about a different method of harnessing the power of rivers. Instead of constructing dams something like egg beaters on a boom would be lowered into the river, which would then spin driving a generator. I wonder what's happening with that.
Don't confuse battery warranty life with operational battery life, by the way.
Some days ago I read in a magazine a reader sent in a question to the editor about warranties on PV panels, how long they are and how does the manufacturer decide. I don't recall exactly how it was put but it was determined something like this, the warranties will be not more than 80% of the expected life of them. If it's determined their life span is 30 years, generating 80% of the rated charge, the warranty will be set to 20 or 25 years. So the operational life can be considerably more than the warranty period.
An electric car does not even need a transmission. Could be a reason why the US auto industry has no plans for a 100% electric vehicle for over 10 years
GM is hoping to put on the market the Chevy Volt in 2010. On the Toyota and Hinda hybrids, which runs off of the gas engine, the batteries supply an assist for acceleration. The Volt though runs off of the batteries, the gas engine recharges the batteries.
Most diesel engines can run on biodiesel though Rudolph Diesel, the designer of the diesel engine, designed it to run off of vegetable oil. While it takes more than just vegetable oil to make diesel, lye has to be added and mixed in, what's left after the fuel is removed can be used elsewhere.
I've never seen someone excited about their vehicle being hard to service before.
That's something that pissed me off about my 2000 car. I used to change oil and filters and repair my own vehicles. But when I wanted to change oil in the new car, this was in 2001, the repair manual for the car said specialized tools were needed to remove the plug and filter. I could see paying $10 for the filter remover but when I checked on the price of this new one it was a lot more than that. So was the tool for the plug, and it only had the one use. Heck, every tool I used to rebuild engines, other than the oil filter tool, in older vehicles had more than one use. There was only one thing I couldn't do myself, I had to take my engine block to a machine shop to have the cylinders bored out.
They're a way of making big bucks out of stupid people. Pure and simple.
Sure some carbon credit schemes are out to part money from people but not all are. Some groups are trying to start rating systems and such. One thing looked at is whether a project financed by people paying into a carbon credit plan will do what's promised. Will a project help, such as plans that will finance alternative energy, solar or wind for instance. Then they look at whether the construction of it will happen without the carbon credits or will only be constructed because of the credits. I don't know of any that does this but one thing I'd like to see is money from carbon offsets be used to buy and build a PV array or wind turbine to provide power to a small African village far from any powerlines where it's used to electrify a school and/or clinic which improves the lives of the people in the village. Children can then go to school to learn. And the adults can take remedial classes, or get training. The clinic could provide health care.
I read an article in the print edition of the IEEE's "Spectrum" where a person in Southeast Asia, Vietnam I think but I'm not sure, started a business building small PV systems. He then sales them to villagers. One villager ran a work shop making things in a small building, and with a light powered by a PV that charged a battery he was able to increase his income. The extra income was more than enough to pay for the loan for the system. A family bought another one and the children could use the light at night to study for school. Then with increased education they would be able to make more money when older. Ended up the person who started the business improved his economics as well as others, besides those who bought a system, he created jobs by hiring people to build the systems. Admittedly that may not be much in the West but it's a big deal in the Third World.
If people really wanted to help the environment, they could stop driving their SUVs instead of purchasing redemption.
That's why some people don't like carbon credits, instead of a person changing their lifestyle they buy credits. However you can do both, change lifestyle and buy credits.
Your completely ignoring the law enforcements accounting of the situation and pressing the one sided "oh we are innocent" side and your links actually show that.
Unless you meant "you are completely" I don't know what you mean. My completely? Makes no sense. As for my links, as I said before in case you did not understand what I said, I got those links from others. Those links are not mine.
If the cops didn't have solid evidence, the judges wouldn't have issued a warrant.
If they had warrants then why didn't the police show them when they were asked for the warrants? Most were only shown after hours of waiting. Why did they not show the warrants as soon as they were asked for them?
Don't make the mistake that I'm saying the cops are right, I'm saying that informant told them what was going on and they acted on it. That is a good investigation and police work, not some threatening situation or something like your attempting to portray it.
And as one of the links I provided said, those informants only got paid of there was an arrest. Of course you overlook that because it doesn't fit in with your beliefs.
Perhaps you didn't pay attention but I previously posted 2 links to the same newspaper as you just did. Actually one of them was to the same article.
Yea, and those informants were getting paid only if there was an arrest.
Who cares. If they didn't product enough evidence and someone got killed because of their actions, you would be bitching that they knew and didn't do anything about it
Bullshit. First, so you only care if someone's arrested? Ok, I'll lie to the police so they'll arrest you so I can get paid. If the police wanted the truth they would have paid whether there was an arrest or not, by only paying if there is an arrest you're inviting corruption. Maybe you do mind it but I do, As for what I'd bitch about, so you can read my mind? You're lousy at it. Not only do I bitch about corruption, but in fact I have said a number of tymes I'd rather 1 guilty person go free than to falsely punish one innocent.
the people arrested in the raids and the stuff confiscated along with the information presented by the informants does not point to some innocent intentions or unfounded actions/accusations
How do you know? Ooh, that's right you can read minds.
There were plenty of people in those houses as well as other places in the area who showed no indication of illegal acts and were not arrested nor denied their lawful right to a lawful protest.
Including those who were there to eyewitness and record the raids, and they got detained as well.
That alone debunks your claims of systematic police abuse.
The detaining of those eyewitnesses debunks your claim nothing wrong happened. Even your " non-biased site" said this: "On Saturday afternoon, law agents surrounded 951 Iglehart Av. in St. Paul where members of I-Witness Video, a New York-based group that monitors police conduct during protests, were staying. They were detained and handcuffed but eventually freed without charges. "
Then again, as a personal entity with no stake in these corporate entities, I could care less about their trademark protections.
I used to write and there's not many things that will get a published writer slapped with a lawsuit faster than to use a trademark as a verb, or in the case of Coca Cola as a pronoun for a generic drink. In my writing classes and in the writing clubs or groups I was a member of this was pretty regularly stressed. A regular person on the streets, or on/. doesn't have to be concerned but someone who writes for a living certainly does.
Anyway, just about everyone uses Google nowadays, so it's usually going to be technically correct to say "googling".
According to TFA not quite 2/3 of searches are done with Google. I wouldn't say that that's "just about everyone". I don't use Google for all of my searches either, most but not all. I also use About.com, Alta Vista, Ask.com, and Dmoz (Open Directory Project).
I want to try Film Gimp aka CinePaint. But I need a book or something to learn it and I haven't found one. That or someone to show me how to use it.
Falcon
Re:Google doesn't want you to say Google
on
Google Turns 10
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Unfortunately for Google (and Adobe, and Xerox) what they want people to do doesn't matter.
While it may not, does not, matter colloquially legally it does. Xerox for instance has gone on at it's own expense to protect it's trademark. Trademark protection is a serious concern in business. Coca-cola's trademark is valued at $72.5 billion dollars.
Cuil did the same to me as Google has done. Using cuil.com I search for photography and the second result is About.com. Searching for Monte Verde and About.com's Monte Verde section is on the first page, the 10th result.
Hey google, what about creating a new search type along the lines of 'look for this search only on messageboards and forums'?
Google is good for blogs but like you say I don't think it's that good for message boards or forums. Alta Vista gives me better results there. What I find weird is that when I've done some searches on Google the top results were from About.com, specifically searching on topics about photography and archaeology or anthropology. Google for monte verde and Google's first result is Tom Dillehay on the First People in South America.
Falcon
Google doesn't want you to say Google
on
Google Turns 10
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Actually TFA says Google doesn't want people to use, say "googling" as a term for generic searches. As it says, there are serious, by business standards, concerns with using the term. It dilutes the trademark. Xerox had the same problem when people started using "xerox" to mean copying or duplicating. You only xerox on a Xerox machine. I skate with inline skates, the skates are Roller Blades, so when I use them I say roller blading. If the skate were not Roller Blades I wouldn't use the term "roller blading".
My point is from when techno-vampire said "there are reports about the ice in the Arctic covering more area than it has in decades". 2007 set a record for the least amount of ice cover in the Arctic, and the 2008 ice coverage was only a little more than 2007. Therefore 2008 did not have more ice covering than in decades. With the exception of 2007 2008 had the least ice coverage.
At which point is it ok - according to you - to say that a trend has ended?
Where did this come from, that a trend ended? I said no such thing.
True. Both, er all, sides want studies that support their version of things.
9/11 brought the CIA back into business, but that does not mean they support terrorism.
Not just the CIA but different US administrations supported, indirectly, terrorism. Starting with Jimmy Carter the US president supported the counter insurgents in Afghanistan after the Soviet Union invaded. Among those who went to Afghan to fight was Osama bin Laden and other Muslims from the Middle East. The US aided them, in part by supplying financing and arms. Al Qaeda came out of that. The US supported them until the Soviets left, Afghanistan was the Soviet's Vietnam, only worse. Then the US dropped Afghan. I don't know if it would have helped but I think if the US had tried to help the Afghans form a stable government thing would not have gotten so bad there through the 1990s.
To dispute the loss of Arctic ice they say that a comparison of 2007 and 2008 shows that Arctic ice extent was 30 per cent greater on August 11, 2008 than it was on the August 12, 2007. However above that they acknowledge 2007 was a record setting year of Arctic Sea ice loss with 2008 coming in second. I didn't know there could only be one way to go, down. Today it's a little cool outside so tomorrow will be cooler. I bet it's just as likely to be warmer tomorrow though.
Great, now we have to worry about melting ice caps AND being overrun by poison ivy. Will this life get any better?
That's not it either, with a warmer world tropical diseases can spread further. Such as malaria. In a warmer world the mosquitoes that carry it can move further north. As can ebola carriers and the other diseases listed on the webpage linked to above or here.
The effects of Global Warming are more pronounced that many realize. "Oh it just makes the world warmer." It does more than that.
Planning on reducing dependence on Middle East oil? Then Canada is your very best friend.
Canada is already the US's largest oil exporter, with Mexico being number two. China is licking it's chops at the Oil Sands in Alberta. I don't know how far they are but there's talk about building an oil pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific coast of Canada to export the oil to China.
You appear to believe that it means reducing emissions "just in case", while many of us believe it means not crippling the US's economic and military power.
Bush is doing quite well crippling the US's economic and military power. As for reducing emissions meaning crippling economic power what many don't or won't see is that it could actually increase the US's economic power. Businesses developing alternative energy sources would mushroom creating well paying jobs then the technology can be exported. Even Texas Oil Billionaire T. Boone Pickens has proposed a plan. Saying "Don't get the idea that I've turned green. My business is making money, and I think this is going to make a lot of money" he's planned on investing $10 billion on wind power. Environmental Engineering is a growing field as well. How many jobs has NanoSolar created? Whether it being solar, wind, or another area renewable energy jobs are being created today, even in installation.
If we were to increase the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere to 0.5%, there's no way green plants could handle it
Actually science has shown it works both ways. Some plants grow slower in a CO2 enriched environment whereas others grow faster. For instance Poison ivy grows faster and bigger with higher atmospheric levels of CO2.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't GM make the EV1 and pull it off the market in 2003?
Yeap, GM released the EV1 then took it off the market, in as you say 2003. Unfortunately it was only available in Arizona and California to the public. And even then it wasn't sold, it was only rented.
the Toyota hybrid system will run on electric power only
"The Atlantic magazine issue I'm reading now is wrong then. This is what it says:
"Because it will have both an electric and a gasoline motor on board, the Volt will be a hybrid. But it will be like no hybrid on the road today. Existing hybrids are gasoline-powered cars, with an electric assist to improve the gas mileage. The Volt will be an electric-powered car, with a gasoline assist to increase the battery's range."
Thanks for pointing that out.
Falcon
Hydroelectric power requires destroying ecosystems? All of the time? News to me.
Hydroelectric does destroy ecosystems, but they don't have to. The Three Gorges Dam in China will flood a lot of land. And to build it the Chinese are forcibly relocating millions of people. With the forests drowned, the rotting trees will produce methane, a greenhouse gas more than 20 tymes more potent than CO2. On top of that studies have shown that dams don't bring all the benefits they were sold as providing. The Epupa Damin Namibia is a good case study on this. The Tucuruí Dam in the Brazilian Amazon shows some things that can go wrong. In the US the Colorado River is an excellent case on the effects of dams. Whereas the river used to empty out into the Gulf of California or Sea of Cortez the water no longer reaches there. Instead dams were built along it to supply water to Nevada and Southern California, desert areas. Unfortunately lakes created by the dams, such as Lake Powell, allow more water to evaporate than what would without those dams. Larger surface areas allow more evaporation.
Sometime ago there was an article posted on /. about a different method of harnessing the power of rivers. Instead of constructing dams something like egg beaters on a boom would be lowered into the river, which would then spin driving a generator. I wonder what's happening with that.
Falcon
Don't confuse battery warranty life with operational battery life, by the way.
Some days ago I read in a magazine a reader sent in a question to the editor about warranties on PV panels, how long they are and how does the manufacturer decide. I don't recall exactly how it was put but it was determined something like this, the warranties will be not more than 80% of the expected life of them. If it's determined their life span is 30 years, generating 80% of the rated charge, the warranty will be set to 20 or 25 years. So the operational life can be considerably more than the warranty period.
Falcon
An electric car does not even need a transmission. Could be a reason why the US auto industry has no plans for a 100% electric vehicle for over 10 years
GM is hoping to put on the market the Chevy Volt in 2010. On the Toyota and Hinda hybrids, which runs off of the gas engine, the batteries supply an assist for acceleration. The Volt though runs off of the batteries, the gas engine recharges the batteries.
Falcon
unless you want to know the difference between driving cars and riding cycles.
Here's another difference.
Falcon
Most diesel engines can run on biodiesel though Rudolph Diesel, the designer of the diesel engine, designed it to run off of vegetable oil. While it takes more than just vegetable oil to make diesel, lye has to be added and mixed in, what's left after the fuel is removed can be used elsewhere.
Falcon
I did.
mufflers are pretty much worthless
They're worth more than that. It takes less energy and money to recycle the metal than it does to mine ore and refine it to make new metal.
Falcon
I've never seen someone excited about their vehicle being hard to service before.
That's something that pissed me off about my 2000 car. I used to change oil and filters and repair my own vehicles. But when I wanted to change oil in the new car, this was in 2001, the repair manual for the car said specialized tools were needed to remove the plug and filter. I could see paying $10 for the filter remover but when I checked on the price of this new one it was a lot more than that. So was the tool for the plug, and it only had the one use. Heck, every tool I used to rebuild engines, other than the oil filter tool, in older vehicles had more than one use. There was only one thing I couldn't do myself, I had to take my engine block to a machine shop to have the cylinders bored out.
Falcon
You're right I was thinking of catalytic converters.
Mufflers generally are not made from things other than stainless steel, steel and aluminum.
However to recycle the metal content of mufflers cost less than it does to mine the ores and make new metal.
Falcon
Sucks to be those thieves, mufflers are made out of stainless steel or rarely aluminum.
Mufflers also contains platinum, a precious metal. Now, does the amount of platinum in mufflers make it worth while to to try to recover the platinum?
Falcon
They're a way of making big bucks out of stupid people. Pure and simple.
Sure some carbon credit schemes are out to part money from people but not all are. Some groups are trying to start rating systems and such. One thing looked at is whether a project financed by people paying into a carbon credit plan will do what's promised. Will a project help, such as plans that will finance alternative energy, solar or wind for instance. Then they look at whether the construction of it will happen without the carbon credits or will only be constructed because of the credits. I don't know of any that does this but one thing I'd like to see is money from carbon offsets be used to buy and build a PV array or wind turbine to provide power to a small African village far from any powerlines where it's used to electrify a school and/or clinic which improves the lives of the people in the village. Children can then go to school to learn. And the adults can take remedial classes, or get training. The clinic could provide health care.
I read an article in the print edition of the IEEE's "Spectrum" where a person in Southeast Asia, Vietnam I think but I'm not sure, started a business building small PV systems. He then sales them to villagers. One villager ran a work shop making things in a small building, and with a light powered by a PV that charged a battery he was able to increase his income. The extra income was more than enough to pay for the loan for the system. A family bought another one and the children could use the light at night to study for school. Then with increased education they would be able to make more money when older. Ended up the person who started the business improved his economics as well as others, besides those who bought a system, he created jobs by hiring people to build the systems. Admittedly that may not be much in the West but it's a big deal in the Third World.
If people really wanted to help the environment, they could stop driving their SUVs instead of purchasing redemption.
That's why some people don't like carbon credits, instead of a person changing their lifestyle they buy credits. However you can do both, change lifestyle and buy credits.
Falcon
You for one.
Your completely ignoring the law enforcements accounting of the situation and pressing the one sided "oh we are innocent" side and your links actually show that.
Unless you meant "you are completely" I don't know what you mean. My completely? Makes no sense. As for my links, as I said before in case you did not understand what I said, I got those links from others. Those links are not mine.
If the cops didn't have solid evidence, the judges wouldn't have issued a warrant.
If they had warrants then why didn't the police show them when they were asked for the warrants? Most were only shown after hours of waiting. Why did they not show the warrants as soon as they were asked for them?
Don't make the mistake that I'm saying the cops are right, I'm saying that informant told them what was going on and they acted on it. That is a good investigation and police work, not some threatening situation or something like your attempting to portray it.
And as one of the links I provided said, those informants only got paid of there was an arrest. Of course you overlook that because it doesn't fit in with your beliefs.
And I looked at a non-biased site and found this.
Perhaps you didn't pay attention but I previously posted 2 links to the same newspaper as you just did. Actually one of them was to the same article.
Yea, and those informants were getting paid only if there was an arrest.
Who cares. If they didn't product enough evidence and someone got killed because of their actions, you would be bitching that they knew and didn't do anything about it
Bullshit. First, so you only care if someone's arrested? Ok, I'll lie to the police so they'll arrest you so I can get paid. If the police wanted the truth they would have paid whether there was an arrest or not, by only paying if there is an arrest you're inviting corruption. Maybe you do mind it but I do, As for what I'd bitch about, so you can read my mind? You're lousy at it. Not only do I bitch about corruption, but in fact I have said a number of tymes I'd rather 1 guilty person go free than to falsely punish one innocent.
the people arrested in the raids and the stuff confiscated along with the information presented by the informants does not point to some innocent intentions or unfounded actions/accusations
How do you know? Ooh, that's right you can read minds.
There were plenty of people in those houses as well as other places in the area who showed no indication of illegal acts and were not arrested nor denied their lawful right to a lawful protest.
Including those who were there to eyewitness and record the raids, and they got detained as well.
That alone debunks your claims of systematic police abuse.
The detaining of those eyewitnesses debunks your claim nothing wrong happened. Even your " non-biased site" said this: "On Saturday afternoon, law agents surrounded 951 Iglehart Av. in St. Paul where members of I-Witness Video, a New York-based group that monitors police conduct during protests, were staying. They were detained and handcuffed but eventually freed without charges. "
Wake the fuck up.
Move to North Korea!
Falcon
Then again, as a personal entity with no stake in these corporate entities, I could care less about their trademark protections.
I used to write and there's not many things that will get a published writer slapped with a lawsuit faster than to use a trademark as a verb, or in the case of Coca Cola as a pronoun for a generic drink. In my writing classes and in the writing clubs or groups I was a member of this was pretty regularly stressed. A regular person on the streets, or on /. doesn't have to be concerned but someone who writes for a living certainly does.
Anyway, just about everyone uses Google nowadays, so it's usually going to be technically correct to say "googling".
According to TFA not quite 2/3 of searches are done with Google. I wouldn't say that that's "just about everyone". I don't use Google for all of my searches either, most but not all. I also use About.com, Alta Vista, Ask.com, and Dmoz (Open Directory Project).
Falcon
I want to try Film Gimp aka CinePaint. But I need a book or something to learn it and I haven't found one. That or someone to show me how to use it.
Falcon
Unfortunately for Google (and Adobe, and Xerox) what they want people to do doesn't matter.
While it may not, does not, matter colloquially legally it does. Xerox for instance has gone on at it's own expense to protect it's trademark. Trademark protection is a serious concern in business. Coca-cola's trademark is valued at $72.5 billion dollars.
Falcon
Cuil did the same to me as Google has done. Using cuil.com I search for photography and the second result is About.com. Searching for Monte Verde and About.com's Monte Verde section is on the first page, the 10th result.
Falcon
Hey google, what about creating a new search type along the lines of 'look for this search only on messageboards and forums'?
Google is good for blogs but like you say I don't think it's that good for message boards or forums. Alta Vista gives me better results there. What I find weird is that when I've done some searches on Google the top results were from About.com, specifically searching on topics about photography and archaeology or anthropology. Google for monte verde and Google's first result is Tom Dillehay on the First People in South America.
Falcon
Actually TFA says Google doesn't want people to use, say "googling" as a term for generic searches. As it says, there are serious, by business standards, concerns with using the term. It dilutes the trademark. Xerox had the same problem when people started using "xerox" to mean copying or duplicating. You only xerox on a Xerox machine. I skate with inline skates, the skates are Roller Blades, so when I use them I say roller blading. If the skate were not Roller Blades I wouldn't use the term "roller blading".
Falcon
My point is from when techno-vampire said "there are reports about the ice in the Arctic covering more area than it has in decades" . 2007 set a record for the least amount of ice cover in the Arctic, and the 2008 ice coverage was only a little more than 2007. Therefore 2008 did not have more ice covering than in decades. With the exception of 2007 2008 had the least ice coverage.
At which point is it ok - according to you - to say that a trend has ended?
Where did this come from, that a trend ended? I said no such thing.
Falcon
True. Both, er all, sides want studies that support their version of things.
9/11 brought the CIA back into business, but that does not mean they support terrorism.
Not just the CIA but different US administrations supported, indirectly, terrorism. Starting with Jimmy Carter the US president supported the counter insurgents in Afghanistan after the Soviet Union invaded. Among those who went to Afghan to fight was Osama bin Laden and other Muslims from the Middle East. The US aided them, in part by supplying financing and arms. Al Qaeda came out of that. The US supported them until the Soviets left, Afghanistan was the Soviet's Vietnam, only worse. Then the US dropped Afghan. I don't know if it would have helped but I think if the US had tried to help the Afghans form a stable government thing would not have gotten so bad there through the 1990s.
Falcon
To dispute the loss of Arctic ice they say that a comparison of 2007 and 2008 shows that Arctic ice extent was 30 per cent greater on August 11, 2008 than it was on the August 12, 2007. However above that they acknowledge 2007 was a record setting year of Arctic Sea ice loss with 2008 coming in second. I didn't know there could only be one way to go, down. Today it's a little cool outside so tomorrow will be cooler. I bet it's just as likely to be warmer tomorrow though.
Falcon
Great, now we have to worry about melting ice caps AND being overrun by poison ivy. Will this life get any better?
That's not it either, with a warmer world tropical diseases can spread further. Such as malaria. In a warmer world the mosquitoes that carry it can move further north. As can ebola carriers and the other diseases listed on the webpage linked to above or here.
The effects of Global Warming are more pronounced that many realize. "Oh it just makes the world warmer." It does more than that.
Falcon
Planning on reducing dependence on Middle East oil? Then Canada is your very best friend.
Canada is already the US's largest oil exporter, with Mexico being number two. China is licking it's chops at the Oil Sands in Alberta. I don't know how far they are but there's talk about building an oil pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific coast of Canada to export the oil to China.
Falcon
You appear to believe that it means reducing emissions "just in case", while many of us believe it means not crippling the US's economic and military power.
Bush is doing quite well crippling the US's economic and military power. As for reducing emissions meaning crippling economic power what many don't or won't see is that it could actually increase the US's economic power. Businesses developing alternative energy sources would mushroom creating well paying jobs then the technology can be exported. Even Texas Oil Billionaire T. Boone Pickens has proposed a plan. Saying "Don't get the idea that I've turned green. My business is making money, and I think this is going to make a lot of money" he's planned on investing $10 billion on wind power. Environmental Engineering is a growing field as well. How many jobs has NanoSolar created? Whether it being solar, wind, or another area renewable energy jobs are being created today, even in installation.
Falcon
If we were to increase the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere to 0.5%, there's no way green plants could handle it
Actually science has shown it works both ways. Some plants grow slower in a CO2 enriched environment whereas others grow faster. For instance Poison ivy grows faster and bigger with higher atmospheric levels of CO2.
Falcon