It is the burning of fossil fuels and the by-products being poured into the atmosphere that is one of the major cause of global warming, and this matter is not in dispute, except by those who have a vested interest in the continued use of fossil fuels—oil companies, coal companies, etc. So the two issues are inextricably linked.

The very conservative Jerry Pournelle, a well-known science fiction writer who has solid science credentials (two PhDs), has worked in the aerospace industry, was a science advisor to President Ronald Reagan (Citizens' Advisory Council on National Space Policy), and was an advocate for SDI—as I said, very conservative—once made the statement that fossil fuels are a limited resource, and when it's gone, it's gone. And, he goes on to say, there are so many essential products made from petroleum, including everything from life-saving pharmaceuticals to the barrels of ball-point pens, that "to deplete the diminishing supply of oil by burning it to produce energy, especially when you consider the non-polluting, renewable alternatives that are available, is a crime against the future!"

And that from hard-charging conservative—but one who is very knowledgeable about matters of astronomy and (most relevant in this context) planetology.

Far from costing jobs, cutting down sharply on the use of fossil fuels and developing renewable alternatives will create jobs and stimulate the economy. The elimination of global warming causing pollution from fossil fuels and the creation of new non-polluting industry (profits to be made!). Two for the price of one. Why are business-oriented conservatives against this?

One reason I would hypothesize is a short-sighted tendency to concentrate on the next quarterly report and immediate profit rather than planning intelligently for even better returns in the future.

Don Firth

P. S. Some wag once made the comment that "We'll have solar power when someone figures out a way to run a sunbeam through a meter!"