Глобалното затопляне или изменението на климата е повишаване на атмосферната температура на земята от края на деветнадесети век. В политиката дебатът за глобалното затопляне е съсредоточен върху това дали това повишаване на температурата се дължи на емисиите на парникови газове или е резултат от естествен модел на земната температура. През 2022 г. Конгресът прие Закона за намаляване на инфлацията, който включва стотици милиарди долари субсидии за инвестиране в проекти за възобновяема енергия и производство на енергия от възобновяеми източници. Законопроектът също така включва кредити за под…
Прочетете още@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Когато мислите за баланса между икономически растеж и опазване на околната среда, кое давате приоритет и защо?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Представете си свят с по-чист въздух, но по-високи разходи за живот поради строгите екологични разпоредби; как този компромис влияе на вашето мнение?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Как възможността за увеличаване на природните бедствия, дължащи се на изменението на климата, се отразява на вашите възгледи относно държавната намеса?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Забелязали ли сте някакви въздействия от изменението на климата във вашата общност и какви мерки смятате, че могат да бъдат предприети на местно ниво?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Как мислите, че бъдещите поколения ще преценят сегашните ни усилия за борба с изменението на климата?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Спомнете си момент, в който сте почувствали лична връзка с природата; как запазването на това чувство би повлияло на позицията ви относно екологичните разпоредби?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Ако трябва да се откажете от едно удобство, за да намалите емисиите, какво би било то и защо?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Какви промени сте наблюдавали във вашите местни метеорологични модели и как смятате, че трябва да реагира обществото?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Представете си свят, в който някои животни са изчезнали поради загуба на местообитания; как това ви кара да отразявате настоящите ни екологични политики?
@ISIDEWITH5 месеца5MO
Как бихте се почувствали, ако любимото ви място на открито беше засегнато от екстремни метеорологични условия и какви стъпки смятате, че биха могли да предотвратят това?
@2TLJD2W3г3Y
No because no matter what the United States does to help the environment, there are many countries who abuse the environment just like we do today. The United States could be the cleanest most environmentally friendly nation in the world but we would be the only one. If you are going to put more regulations do it for the whole world. The environment is more than just the U.S.
@2TLGYPC3г3Y
Not convinced there is global warming. That said, everyone should be good stewards of the earth God gave us to live on rather than be after that almighty dollar.
@2TLG3SB4г4Y
This is a way to kill jobs. Businesses should do all they can to preserve the environment while creating jobs.
Non-profits should be encouraged to spearhead this campaign through private donations
@2TLC6JQ3г3Y
Anthropogenic global warming is a scam perpetrated by the United Nations.
@2TL4MPH3г3Y
Change it to global pollution instead of global warming and you'll get more bi partisan support to curb any root causes.
@2TJ68PR3г3Y
Global warming is a natural occurrence however we should still do what ever we can to protect the environment. The incentives need to be enough to warrant the business implementing them. I know a City who dumps sewage into a river and pays the fines because it is less than the cost to handle the sewage properly. That's messed up.
@2THY3CW3г3Y
Environmental regulations to control pollution are fine, but not in the name of "global warming" or "climate change." While I believe these are natural climate cycles, there is no harm in seeking to prevent egregious pollution.
@2THSPM74г4Y
No, tax carbon emissions instead. But also tax other emissions so that activities show their true environmental cost. Then use the collected money for environmental restoration and preservation.
@2THPT283г3Y
No EPA should not increase regulations to prevent global warming. The U.S. does plenty to reduce carbon emissions to the detriment of jobs and the economy. Pressure counties like China, India, and Brazil to reduce their carbon emissions. Never hear liberals complain about these countires.
@2THP64K3г3Y
government should stop the politics of environmental regulation; no funding for AGW; no Kyoto; no carbon tax; no secret treaties; no wealth transfer to UN or foreign despots
@2THJF6N3г3Y
Climate change is natural phenomenon and has and continues to change regardless of man's activities. Government policies should be based on science (not consensus) aimed at mitigating the effects of climate changes.
@2TH9XX53г3Y
I believe in the free market if the government instead of forcing people to go green makes their non greenness know people can choose to go with other companies costing the less green company money thus making them want to go green to beat the other companies.
@2TH8GMG4г4Y
This issue is based on politically motivated science. I don't think there is enough information to accurately make a decision.
@2TGK3KJ3г3Y
Petroleum companies should not be allowed billions in corporate wellfare. The rest should take care of itself.
@2JJ24KZ3г3Y
No, they need to reevaluate the thousands of laws and restrictions they already have and apply some common sense regulations.
@2JHYXCV3г3Y
Provide incentives for alternative energy production, stop subsidizing oil and gas and coal.
@2JHV9LG3г3Y
No, global warming is a natural occurrence. But it is good for businesses to be ethical. Provide fees for unethical environmental practices.
@2JHV4MY4г4Y
No, government regulations risk becoming corrupt and harming the people and things they are supposed to protect.
@2JHSK7V3г3Y
There is no Global warming! It's the natural cycle of the Earth. Right now, we're in a cooling phase, not warming.
@2JHRNW43г3Y
Emissions are a problem, but many of the alternative energy solutions are worse. We fool ourselves into believing that an electric car is better for the environment because we don't see the emissions....but much of the power for electrics comes from coal. Furthermore, the batteries are often made with unrecyclable materials that are quite toxic. Fund the research, but never be satisfied with the results.
@2JHP99W3г3Y
global warming cycles are normal, but adding incentives for alternate forms of energy should be consider to reduce any man made impact.
@NewEnglandDevil3г3Y
No, it is far more efficient to adapt to changing conditions, regardless of cause. Additionally, there are benefits to global warming including food production, reduced mortality due to cold weather, etc.
@2JHGFJP4г4Y
More unilateral action by our govt. while countries like China build things like huge canals through the rainforests and use the proceeds for a historic record peacetime military buildup is stupid.
@2JHBJMV3г3Y
Depends on the motivation behind those regulations and the science backing them. Track record so far is to find ways to increase tax with little or no environmental outcome - so NO, not without very good reason.
@2JH6QQZ3г3Y
Some regulation is needed but we also need to ensure we don't make it so complicated that businesses cannot compete in the US. or make it a requirement that goods shipped to the Us have to have the same standards as they would here. This will ensure more jobs stay here
@2JH38WY3г3Y
Penalties should be higher and stricter to keep environmental damage in check
@2JGLR2Y3г3Y
Government should increase environmental regulations when bad actors are harming the environment. Same type of question back to you: Should government increase financial regulations to prevent global financial problems?
No, the government should increase environmental regulations to prevent the destruction of our environment. Do not politicize protecting the environment by tying regulations to global warming.
@2JG6MBR3г3Y
Truthful studies are needed and only then should regulations be implemented, but not just based on theory, and proof has not been confirmed in the last 50 years, they should go back 200 years to determine if the earth is heating up or just a 100 year cycle.
@2JFRCZ63г3Y
No. Environmental regulations will not prevent global warming.
@2JDXSJT3г3Y
If it can be proven that global warming exists, and is caused by the emission of greenhouse gasses, the biggest cause of global warming must be the government. Early automobiles were a novelty, only afforded by the wealthiest Americans. It was not until our government poured trillions into building new and improving existing roads did the auto industry flourish. Then, with the government creating housing projects and government subsidized housing, criminals found it affordable to live in our nation's wealthiest zip codes, which caused a fleeing to the suburbs to avoid the government caus… Прочетете още
@2JDLZ9K3г3Y
Global warming is more natural than the ideologues would have you believe. I am for alternate energy but not before it is an economically viable solution. I do not approve of the govt forcing policies and technology before they are efficient and affordable. Pushing policies before affordable efficient alternatives exist push more people into poverty and dependence on the govt
Yes, the government should always be looking to increase environmental regulations not because of Global Warming but because it is the best thing for the earth, but in balance with economics, technologies and incentives for American companies to grow. And truly for the environment and not to win votes or make friends wealthy.
@2JDB5GX3г3Y
Yes. Especially become aggressive in activism pertaining to regulations for the countries that are the greatest threats to our environment.
@2JD6LJ84г4Y
Halt production of chemicals, GMO's, insist of a zero discharge technology as an interim to a space-based manufacturing technology. Obviously the surface of the earth is not suitable to the evolution of an industrial technology. Best savings are from conservation first then develop decentralized energy production, mostly solar. Stop all coal, nukes, etc. Clean up the mess!