global emissions reductions of global warming gasses has been globally ignored by our global leaders. australia had a flirtation with a scheme to do our bit but like most polluting countries we decided that it might in some small but measurable way reduce our standard of living. (translate: 40″ television instead of the 42″ you really wanted.)
john quiggin has some big ideas about global warming and seems to think that maybe we should be searching for a global solution, start treating our stratosphere as a shared resource rather than something that exists only over our heads. as a handy side effect you might just reduce global poverty.
WTF? you might be asking. what has this to do with me?
that’s a good question and thanks for asking. after all, you have no real idea of the depth of global poverty nor any way to give a rat’s arse. you think real poverty is being unable to afford deep dish rims. your mates all have them and you’ve barely got enough money left at the end of the week to pay your rent after pissing the rest up against the wall. well here’s the catch, as a cyclist you’re a non-polluter. this is something you and the rural poor of bangladash have in common. now read this bit:
With an entitlement of two tonnes per person per year, and a price of $US200/tonne, a person with no net emissions would attract an entitlement worth $400 per year, or $1.10 per day
awesome huh? if you were a bangladesh peasant you could feed a family of four their first decent meal in weeks, or since you’re not, you could put it toward one of those stinky energy drinks you consume. (sadly the aluminium can probably entirely negates your zero emissions standard. so spend it wisely dickhead or we’ll take it off you.)
 |
| credit: andy singer |
