View Single Post
Old 02-15-2007, 07:39 PM   #62
dude1394
Guru
 
dude1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
dude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

My belief on this is that the companies have decided that the climatologists have the media behind them and have decided that there is no use in debating it anymore. WHETHER THEY ARE CORRECT OR NOT.

They will now just make money on it, put carbon based tax on their products and go forward. They have the money, expertise and technological wherewithal to invest in clean technologies, always have but felt it was bull****. I expect they still do in most cases, but see the PR battle has been either won or isn't worth the effort.

They gain more good public will by agreeing with the climatologists, no matter that our energy prices will now increase. They'll just pass those costs along to the consumer now, whereas they couldn't before.

I wonder if the same climatologists are going to be calling for a windfall profits tax on the increased price of energy. When will the first evil ethanol company be criticised. Pretty soon I imagine.
__________________
"Yankees fans who say “flags fly forever’’ are right, you never lose that. It reinforces all the good things about being a fan. ... It’s black and white. You (the Mavs) won a title. That’s it and no one can say s--- about it.’’
dude1394 is offline   Reply With Quote