The New York Times let go of the media’s “How dare you make that much money,” attitude on July 3 to support a new kind of executive. The green kind.
“The new environmental chiefs are helping companies profit from the push to go green,” wrote Claudia H. Deutsch.
Deutsch’s article supported the concept talking about how it will make money for companies, without mentioning any drawbacks. She also left out the radical left-wing nature of some of the groups mentioned in the story. The only criticism of the new positions came from the left.
The Times quoted Eileen Claussen, president of the pro-Kyoto Pew Center on Global Climate Change. Claussen, who also served in the Clinton administration, has advocated extremist global warming policies and testified before the Senate about the importance of the Kyoto Protocol – which would have cost taxpayers several hundred billion dollars a year.
Deutsch also quoted Gwen Ruta of the liberal group Environmental Defense. Ruta told the Times, “In the best of all worlds, we wouldn’t need a separate person to link strategy and sustainability.”
Overlooked by the Times was what consumers and investors would actually get from the creation of this expensive position. In 2000, the average corporate salary for the top five executives at 1,500 of the largest publicly traded firms tracked by Standard & Poor's was $894,100 for women and $1,333,700 for men.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I heard this on Rush today an
July 3, 2007 - 19:01 ET by drillanwrI heard this on Rush today and couldn't believe it. Wondering how far over the edge the GW Cultists can go? I do believe that now I may have heard everything ... or pretty damn close to it:
Human greed takes lion's share of solar energy
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/human-greed-takes-lions-share-of-solar-energy/2007/07/02/1183351126304.html
So, just think of all that solar energy going to waste on all those other planets in the system??
My local news tonight had a b
July 3, 2007 - 21:39 ET by Conservative in the ArtsMy local news tonight had a bit handed down from NY HQ about how to BBQ for the 4th the GREEN way. It was pure BS about how my charcoal is spewing forth so much greenhouse gasses.
Tip of the day: go out and BUY a solar BBQ or make one of your own. At least the local anchor then put in that to BBQ on a solar one takes longer.
No one will ever accuse lib
July 4, 2007 - 02:10 ET by riff_raffNo one will ever accuse liberal environmentalists of be objective or logical. And for you liberal arts majors: Unbiased objectivity and logic are two of the basic tenets of scientific process.
Regarding drillanwr's link "Human greed takes lion's share of solar energy":
Green plants are only capable of converting about 6.6% of the solar energy they are exposed to into stored chemical energy. Relatively inefficient, but they make up for it in bulk. That leaves over 93% of the photons striking the earth available for other important purposes (like producing perfect tan lines on the gals down at my favorite strip bar).
http://www.upei.ca/~...
Humans on the other hand, use more efficient methods to capture solar energy, like photovoltaics. Which can have conversion efficiencies (solar to electric) as high as 40%. The only problem with photovoltaics is that the production of the semiconductor for the solar cell requires almost as much energy as the solar cell will produce over its anticipated life span. So why bother, right?
The only people that seem to grasp the whole chemical-to-electrical energy conversion thing completely are the coal and oil companies. Coal and gas are currently the most cost effective ways to produce electricity. So that's what we use. And think about it. Coal is simply stored plant energy that the plant no longer needs.