Could Carbon Labeling Combat Climate Change?

Posted by: TomC

Tagged in: Untagged

This article angered me. Unlike the energy use labels that are used as a model for this fictitious "carbon footprint" amount, the energy use amount is measurable. The fictitious "carbon footprint" amount is a feel good number that can only be based on contrived numbers. They talk about one example of Brazilian beef and its number not including the deforestation necessary for the grazing cattle--fictional contrivance!

Are we to include the gas that employees of an appliance manufacturer use to get to work to build the appliance? How about the fuel for the raw materials used? The carbon footprint of the flatulence of the employees and the animals they eat? Anything can be included and government or some czar(ista) will have to be appointed to determine whether company A or B, or unionize company C is to include what additions to their numbers.

More government nonsense. The energy labels were government mandated--I hate that--but companies were including energy use well before that unneeded mandate. Consumer Reports reported on the energy use without government. This fictitious "carbon footprint" nonsense is more government run-a-muck.

Comments (1)add comment
Barthélemy Barbancourt
More job killing regulation
written by Barthélemy Barbancourt , May 10, 2011

that does nothing to help anyone. This is why the right has to fight so hard against the religion of MMGW. The left plans to use it to fundamentally restructure society is ways that they want. The result will be a massively socialistic system of shared poverty and misery.

Until the enevitable revolt, then we get to look forward to a period of anarchy. The last time we has that we called it the Dark Ages.

Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.