I sent y’all in the last post to a Harvard site where they ask these two questions, paraphrased:
1. Would you be willing to spend hundreds of dollars/household/year in the US lowering our greenhouse gas emissions, for example, by building more expensive coal power plants that sequester — geologically store — the carbon, and raising the price of gasoline and all other greenhouse gas emissions?
2. Would you be willing to spend hundreds of dollars/household/year in extra taxes so that we can subsidize third world construction of lower greenhouse gas emitting projects, such as building more expensive (and much less polluting) coal power plants?
Assume that the new expenditures would start January 2009.
I’d like to see your votes at this site, and your reasons. So please comment!
I would happily have voted in favor of the necessary spending, but the Harvard site made it difficult and annoying. First it said you need Quicktime 6 or later to view the videos. I had Quicktime 6 at the time, but the videos did not work with my version of Quicktime. I then downloaded Quicktime 7, which presumably would have been able to run the videos, but I realized that I could have read the material on the videos in half the time it took to view them–but the site did not offer this alternative. So I ended up not voting, and I very nearly sent the Harvard url to my favorite web site critique page, Web Pages That Suck. You have to give people options, in particular the option not to watch a video. I tried to vote without watching the video, which was superfluous in my case because I am already convinced, but the site wouldn’t let me do that. Fair enough–an uninformed vote is useless–but couldn’t I have been allowed to access the material in written form?
Harvard’s bad.