Re: ECO: Saying Nay to the Doomsayers

From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Jul 27 2002 - 14:28:13 MDT


Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
> Christian Szegedy wrote:
>
> If nagative
> side effects of the production of some products can lead to such processes,
> then
> the negative pulicity would have its effect only after it's too late. So I
> think
> that some regulation based on scientific analysis is really necessary then.
>
> ### The fear of litigation will have its effect way before things start to
> go bad - all you need is for the boards of directors of power and gas
> companies to find out there is scientific consensus predicting their
> products will cause global warming, together with a method for calculating
> the losses (if any) due to warming. Once they know it, they will be very
> careful about exposing themselves to a class action lawsuit on behalf of e.g
> persons and businesses harmed by hurricanes. So, scientific analysis is all
> you need, and no regulation at all.
>

Unfortunately, that may be far to late to actually deal with the
causes set in motion. After the companies are sued into
bankruptcy the causes will still be active. Too bad for us or
our children.

When large-scale potentially disasterous effects result from the
size of levers we are currently capable of deploying we need a
mechanism for determining how these levers are deployed BEFORE
the damage is done. I do not know what that is within desirable
parameters

- s.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:42 MST