🚀 go-pugleaf

"Mr Right" <Mr.I.Am.Right@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:608f2463-0c7b-4a64-91f3-8ccd919d084d@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 19, 2:40 am, "hot frog" <sh...@tension.span> wrote:
>
> > Heating water certainly chews up a lot of energy, and is another area
where
> >many people can make a big difference for little or no expense in the
long
> > run. I've written several posts over the years on our solar hot water
> > system, which paid for itself in five years and has been saving us money
> > ever since. It has also reduced our carbon footprint by about 32 tonnes
of
> > CO2.
>
> You must have VERY small feet.    :)
>
> I do not have any problem with people being efficient and economical
> in areas that they genuinely believe in. However, I fear that being
> totally motivated by one factor (e.g. your carbon footprint, but it
> could be anything else) tends to make you blind to all of the other
> factors. Will you feel good about having a small carbon footprint if
> you discover that you have a huge mercury footprint, dioxin footprint,
> lead footprint, carcinogen footprint, radiation footprint, etc, etc.
>
> The trouble with the green energy credits, carbon credits, or whatever
> you want to call them, is that they CAN encourage producers into means
> of production that are more carbon friendly, but bad in other ways,
> and this "bad" is subsidized and encouraged by the "credit".

That is a real concern. I have similar concerns about the "hydrogen economy"
regarding the energy consumed and pollution generated producing, containing
and transporting the H2. The only solution I can see is an accounting system
covering all embodied energy, toxins and so on for everything produced in
large quantities.