Opwarming van de aarde, of klimaatverandering, is een toename van de atmosferische temperatuur op aarde sinds het einde van de negentiende eeuw. In de politiek draait het debat over de opwarming van de aarde om de vraag of deze temperatuurstijging het gevolg is van de uitstoot van broeikasgassen of het gevolg is van een natuurlijk patroon in de temperatuur op aarde. In 2022 keurde het Congres de Inflation Reduction Act goed, die honderden miljarden dollars aan subsidies omvatte voor investeringen in projecten voor hernieuwbare energie en de productie van energie uit hernieuwbare bronnen.…
Lees verder@8TC36HZ3 jaar3Y
de overheid moet alles doen wat nodig is voor he klimaat maar niet meer dan nodig is.
Dit moet internationaal besloten worden
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Als u nadenkt over de balans tussen economische groei en milieubescherming, welke prioriteit geeft u dan en waarom?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Stel je een wereld voor met schonere lucht maar hogere kosten van levensonderhoud als gevolg van strenge milieuregels; Welke invloed heeft deze afweging op uw mening?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hoe beïnvloedt de mogelijkheid van een toename van natuurrampen als gevolg van klimaatverandering uw kijk op overheidsinterventie?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Heeft u enige gevolgen van de klimaatverandering in uw gemeenschap opgemerkt en welke maatregelen zouden volgens u op lokaal niveau kunnen worden genomen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hoe denk je dat toekomstige generaties onze huidige inspanningen om de klimaatverandering te bestrijden zullen beoordelen?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Denk terug aan een moment waarop je een persoonlijke band met de natuur voelde; Hoe zou het behouden van dat gevoel uw standpunt over milieuregelgeving beïnvloeden?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Als je één gemak zou moeten opgeven om de uitstoot te verminderen, wat zou dat dan zijn en waarom?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Welke veranderingen heb je waargenomen in je lokale weerpatronen, en hoe denk je dat de samenleving hierop moet reageren?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Stel je een wereld voor waarin bepaalde dieren zijn uitgestorven als gevolg van verlies van leefgebied; Hoe doet dit u nadenken over ons huidige milieubeleid?
@ISIDEWITH5mos5MO
Hoe zou u zich voelen als uw favoriete buitenplek getroffen zou worden door extreem weer, en welke stappen zouden dit volgens u kunnen voorkomen?
@2TLJD2W4 jaar4Y
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.
@2TLGYPC4 jaar4Y
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.
@2TLG3SB4 jaar4Y
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
@2TLC6JQ4 jaar4Y
Anthropogenic global warming is a scam perpetrated by the United Nations.
@2TL4MPH4 jaar4Y
Change it to global pollution instead of global warming and you'll get more bi partisan support to curb any root causes.
@2TJ68PR4 jaar4Y
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.
@2THY3CW4 jaar4Y
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.
@2THSPM74 jaar4Y
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.
@2THPT284 jaar4Y
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.
@2THP64K4 jaar4Y
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
@2THJF6N4 jaar4Y
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.
@2TH9XX54 jaar4Y
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.
@2TH8GMG4 jaar4Y
This issue is based on politically motivated science. I don't think there is enough information to accurately make a decision.
@2TGK3KJ4 jaar4Y
Petroleum companies should not be allowed billions in corporate wellfare. The rest should take care of itself.
@2JJ24KZ4 jaar4Y
No, they need to reevaluate the thousands of laws and restrictions they already have and apply some common sense regulations.
@2JHYXCV4 jaar4Y
Provide incentives for alternative energy production, stop subsidizing oil and gas and coal.
@2JHV9LG4 jaar4Y
No, global warming is a natural occurrence. But it is good for businesses to be ethical. Provide fees for unethical environmental practices.
@2JHV4MY4 jaar4Y
No, government regulations risk becoming corrupt and harming the people and things they are supposed to protect.
@2JHSK7V4 jaar4Y
There is no Global warming! It's the natural cycle of the Earth. Right now, we're in a cooling phase, not warming.
@2JHRNW44 jaar4Y
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.
@2JHP99W4 jaar4Y
global warming cycles are normal, but adding incentives for alternate forms of energy should be consider to reduce any man made impact.
@NewEnglandDevil4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JHGFJP4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JHBJMV4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JH6QQZ4 jaar4Y
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
@2JH38WY4 jaar4Y
Penalties should be higher and stricter to keep environmental damage in check
@2JGLR2Y4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JG6MBR4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JFRCZ64 jaar4Y
No. Environmental regulations will not prevent global warming.
@2JDXSJT4 jaar4Y
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… Lees verder
@2JDLZ9K4 jaar4Y
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
@2JDG89PRepublikein4 jaar4Y
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.
@2JDB5GX4 jaar4Y
Yes. Especially become aggressive in activism pertaining to regulations for the countries that are the greatest threats to our environment.
@2JD6LJ84 jaar4Y
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!
@2JD5LR94 jaar4Y
De historische activiteit van gebruikers die zich bezighouden met deze question .
Loading data...
Grafiek laden...
De politieke thema’s laden van gebruikers die zich met deze discussie hebben beziggehouden
Loading data...