Chronos is right on the money.

there is global warming on Mars, so its a natural phenomenon, carbon footprints and global warming is being exploited by governments and companies alike. For governments its a tax revenue creator for commercial organisations its a money spinner for environmental claims. The scientists who set out to prove it, had their goal in mind and worked the models to get the answers they wanted, there is no science here, this is very well documented on the net, go google...

In the seventies there was mass panic that we were heading for a man made ice age in much the same way, that just created a lot of revenue as well.

This is just another passing phase, if there is global warming there is nothing we can do to effect it. Especially when volcanoes like mount st Helens put out years and years worth of CO2 in a few hours. If the environment were unstable as is claimed, these events would have ended the world, and guess what?? they didn't.

When recession comes all that carbon/green crap goes straight out the window. 

When it comes to low energy light bulbs or bread and water the choice becomes obvious.

Personally I will take no part in the "green", "low carbon" hysteria that currently grips the planet, its scientically unproven in an independant way, and governments are busy making up consumptive taxes, so our economy becomes dependant on polluters, how sensible is that? 

If we all stopped driving cars and buying petrol tomorrow the economy would collapse overnight making the latest banking scandle seem like an argument over kiddies piggy bank.

All of you can do your green stuff, I'll carry on earning a living.

When the next environmental apocolyptic bandwagon comes along you lot can jump on that too, meanwhile I will have saved myself a fortune not bothering, while everyone else gets hurded like sheep.

Here is you starter for 10

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/swindle.htm

Read it and weep - LOL

Nice little irony there, Mister "Chronos" with your "I won't be around".

Talk about "verifiable", what do you think climate change scientists have been doing for the last few decades?

Yes, CFLs and whybrids cost more in the long run. That's a big scam. But you're throwing the baby (more on those in a sec) out with the bathwater. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions, sequestering carbon, reducing packaging, reducing energy usage.. all these activities and more will --verifiably -- help not just the climate, but the economy, and will reduce competition for limited resources of all kinds. Resources such as minerals, transport, and energy. It's called "efficiency". It's a major component of capitalism.

Babies -- yep, people are having 'em, and they'll grow up and be alive long after you've ravaged yourself six foot under with your lack of concern for others. Those grown ups will have babies too, and so on and so on... whaddya know? They'll be the poor buggers who collect on your little environmental investment.

So, do try to keep your nutcase nihilist views to yourself, won't you? We've got a planet to save here. I know I won't change the world -- some help would be appreciated.

Shame.

Let me reiterate: The planet and the environment are fine. It's the people that are screwed. The planet doesn't care. It'll be here when we're long gone and the general consensus from every other species, ecosystem and evolutionary development path will be "good riddance." It's gross arrogance to assume that we can make a difference to an ecosystem we don't even begin to understand so screw you, WWF and everyone else (UK government, I'm looking in your general direction) trying to make money from misplaced conscience, I'm going to enjoy what's left of this, in geological terms, blink of an eye we're the dominant species here in this little corner of the Universe because, frankly, you idiots are simply plain wrong and all the little things you're bleeding us dry with are going to make sod-all difference in the long run. Take CFLs: They use more energy than they save over tungsten filament lamps to produce and dispose of safely, leaving alone the cost, complexity and toxicity of the materials used. They do not last any longer in normal use, unless you only switch them on and off twice in their lifetime, so what's the point? Yet another feel-good, make-no-difference idea that costs you and I thousands.

Face it, we can have the same or better lifestyle now, without worrying about your damned precious CO2 [1] with nuke fission power, if only you damned Luddites would actually look at the advances made or even just let those advances happen. As it is, you seem dead set on reducing us back to the stone-age, just as the oil cartels have a vested interest in keeping us in the fossil fuel age, and have lost all credibility in the eyes of those who eschew groupthink.

My solution: Bring on the pebble-beds. It's the only chance we have for survival once the planet's self-defence mechanisms kick in, the forests burn, the volcanoes erupt due to expansion of the crust and we settle down for the long winter as the planetary albedo raises to more acceptable (for Planet Earth, not us) levels, something that the ecotards are missing completely from their "models." Extreme prediction? Perhaps, but it's no less credible than that of the ecotards, and it didn't cost you, the taxpayer, a seven-figure sum in research grants to hear. I won't be around, it matters not a jot to me. You'll have to make your own minds up.

Save the planet, boy! Save! Save!

[1] H2O is a far worse greenhouse gas and lowering the planetary albedo by reducing particulate emissions that encourage cloud - clouds being water droplets in the liquid phase or even the solid phase in the case of cirrostratus and the like, rather than vapour in the gaseous - cover has left far more gaseous water into the atmosphere. See what I mean? We AND the planet have been burning shit for eons and this kept the albedo stable. They understand jack about the planet's systems, either that or they're conveniently ignoring certain aspects to keep the gravy train rolling, despite planetary albedo being the one verifiable variable that makes a significant difference. Just search the web for "planetary albedo GMST." Trust me, they know about this mechanism and its contribution to GMST, but it's never spoken of in polite conversation.