Saving the world from a harmless, essential trace(some 380 parts per MILLION) gas is on par with the silliest missions mankind has ever concocted, undertaken. We'll envy those guys that speculated on how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

When we we all learn that it's all about wealth transfer? And like the first Socialist that saw his neighbor building a wonderful dwelling out of stone and killed him for it when it was completed, today's social engineers can only propose taking the wealth that Capitalism has created and transferring it into their pockets, with a few shekels (dinars with Socialists?) given to developing nations as an aside. That's the only "green" that matters in this whole exercise.

By the way, the European Climate Exchange and the Chicago Climate Exchange will be the exclusive marketplaces for the trading carbon credits. And Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley--currently the "wind beneath Nancy Pelosi's wings" in these matter before Congress will be the primary US beneficiaries of their "cap-and-trade schemes." The outgoing chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., wrote in the Dec. 18 Wall Street Journal, cap-and-trade “would cost the average American family more than $2,700 a year while having no measurable impact on global temperature.” I see that as a conservative estimate. And you do know that brokers make money up or down in the market, don't you? Think of that the next time one calls you when you are on the toilet in the morning, getting ready to go to work. They don't even thank you for buying them their new cars, even.

LMA, can't we just send you gin? We'd hate to see you squander our offsets on food or something frivolous like that.

Funny you should say that: I am, at this moment, drinking gin that you sent me for Christmas. This is from that tiny little bottle of good old Tanqueray. (Yes--I have a few of those left! Yum!)

This is the first dirty martini I've consumed since my stay in Washington, D.C. The first hard liquor, in fact, since I got back from the East Coast. (On airplanes, I consume bloody Marys, for some reason: probably a craving for vitamin C.)

And, yeah--my jury is still out on the "greenhouse effect" as a contributor to global warming. And it's out on global warming itself as a for-sure-and-certain Bad Thing.

However, a lot of the activity that comes under the rubric of "avoiding global warming" has potentially bitchin' side effects, such as: 1) encouraging alternative energy sources, and thereby hastening the day when we can tell the Saudis/Iranians to fuck themselves, and 2) keeping pollution at a manageable level in the cities. As a chick with sensitive lungs and lots of allergies--who prefers blue skies to brown ones--I don't see anything to cry about when it comes to better air.

Don't get me wrong: I'm pro-capitalist. But I love the idea that countries we consider "developing" now will be using better technology than we did at the equivalent phases in our own development. Go with God, my brothers and sisters.

Every dollar misspent on nonsense is a further delay in achieving energy independence. Every dollar spent by industry 'fighting' Demon CO2 will be paid back by the consumer. And it is a dollar that would be better spent on anything of real value, like alternative fuels research. Just imagine the world where the New World Odor(sic) is finally funded--with at least a $Trillion from the US economy alone. Where do you think the funds to fight the War on Terror will come from? It will have to move to the European "police action" response--doing nothing of any real value. Inspector Clouseau reporting for duty!

I'd be happy to send Ace some sex offsets if only mine weren't costing me $160 per encounter.