🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3613f30f.3559695@fermi.dialix.com.au>, Greig Ebeling
<eggsoft@sydney.dialix.oz> writes

>Remedial action on soil degradation.
>Preservation of water supplies
>Protection of ocean life and fisheries
>Native forest flora and fauna preservation.
>etc etc 

>So, Richard, which projects do you think are less important than
>climate change?  Please produce a list of those projects you believe
>should cancelled or reduced to provide funding for the costs of Kyoto.

If (and I stress the if) the predictions regarding climate change are
right, then it may well have a far greater impact on many of the items
you mentioned above than the problems which the above remedial action is
designed to counter. I personally believe we have to take climate change
very seriously indeed - at least while we do more to find out what is
really going on. 

As for the cost of implementing Kyoto, I believe that more money can be
found for environmental change than you suggest. Many of the
environmental improvements that can be made actually benefit companies
and governments financially (waste reduction, etc.), for example. To say
that we can't afford environmental improvements today is to push that
cost onto tommorow - with inflation. 

Richard Vialls              (please replace nospam with demon for email & WWW)
Black Cat Electronics - contract electronics design
Bodrwyn, Cerrigceinwen, Bodorgan,                     Phone: +44(0)1407 720717
Anglesey, LL62 5EF, UK.                    Email: rvialls@blakcat.nospam.co.uk
                                          Web: http://www.blakcat.nospam.co.uk