Cheap carbon = high emissions

Global carbon-dioxide emissions have grown by 25% since Kyoto was adopted in 1997 (source is here). Now can anyone tell me how we are going to achieve even 1% reduction by 2020 compared to our 1990 levels with the policies we have now? As long as the environmental cost is not factored into the price of carbon based energy sources, why would anyone care about doing the right thing? Let's have a carbon tax on ANYTHING pumping CO2 (and other climate change gases) into the atmosphere so that the final cost of using them is really reflected in the price the consumers pay. Then and only then will the free market really work its magic. And it would be so easy to regulate how much climate change gases would be emitted, just adjust the tax according to how far we are from the emission targets. The market would do the rest. The other beauty of the carbon tax would also be that it could be phased in incrementally and would send a powerful and proper signal to consumers and industries from which they could adapt knowing it is here to stay.
It is either this or ,as Cypher said, "It means fasten your seat belt Dorothy, 'cause Kansas is going bye-bye."

Population control debate

This is from an online debate hosted by The Economist:
"During the past few years, the size of the world’s population has become a matter of public debate in a way not seen since the 1970s. The total number of people, 6.7 billion now, is forecast to surpass 9 billion by 2050. Many observers fear that an environment degraded by climate change will not be able to support so many. Half the British population, according to one opinion poll, think people should not have more than two children. Yet at the same time governments in Japan, Germany and Russia have been trying to reverse those countries’ falling populations. When is a growing population a blessing and when is it a curse? Is there a best size for the population of the world, or of any particular country? Should governments introduce population-control policies, whether voluntary or mandatory? And how important to demographic matters is climate change?"

You can follow how the debate went here.

Interesting to see that the people in favor (aka agreeing that we are too many) actually increases during the debate, to a total of 80% when it closed.