Mr. Miller has bought in to the "science of fear and arrogance" since it's proven through core drillings in the artic that CO2 and global warming are not correlated. How arrogant for him or anyone to buy in to the fact we need to control cow farts and a natural component of our exhales for saving our planet. Would he like to eliminate all the volcanic erruptions as well?

I agree about real pollution such as SO2, etc., but PLEASE DO NOT PUBLISH such foolishness promoted by Gore and politics.

Thank you!

I agree with the previous commenter in that there is an element of politics in the article.
First, you seem thrilled, almost breathless in your excitement, Mr. Millar (I am reminded of a TV commentator that got a tingling sensation running up his leg after an Obama speech), about Obama and the Democratic congress finally getting a chance to get things done about this "global warming", which seems more of a natural cycle to me than anything else. What was implied was that the previous administration should have done this. Right from the gitgo, you have colored the rest of the article in political blue. I don't want red or blue...I want facts.
I am not a scientist, but I have read enough articles to know that there is no clear evidence that man has caused "global warming". Even NASA recently said something about this. The author refers to both "climate change" and "global warming" in this article. I think "climate change" is more appropriate when discussing the ways that man could impact the environment.
The article does a good job of explaining how cap-and-trade works but it also seems to praise the environmental successes of cap-and-trade programs (it sounds wonderful in your article...I almost got a tingle) without mentioning the costs to everyone, especially in this economy, in increased prices and lost jobs as overtaxed (that's what this is...just another tax) businesses close shop and move overseas...in that respect, the environment would be improved, if businesses shut down their factories. No money to buy beef, so the cow methane is reduced. People starving to death...fewer polluters. I'm being facetious...a little...but my point is that I need you to be factual when providing me with information and insight...let us each add our own political spin to the information, if we so choose. It's good to know how these laws and programs work and how they will impact us...whether they are based on sound scientific data or not, they will impact us until the laws are changed again or we go broke.
So, the article should provide me with straightforward information:
The laws are going to change (cap-and-trade, reporting, registry, verification, accreditation, etc.)...
This is how cap-and-trade will work...
This is how reporting and registry will work...
This is how verification and accreditation will work...
And with each of the above, these are the possible impacts to your business and/or your customers' businesses.
Done.
Don't try to sell me on Obama vs Bush or use terms to imply that the theory that man and not the Sun has caused the Earth's temperature to go up is a foregone conclusion or how great you think cap-and-trade is...because that ruined the article for me.

Jeff Greer
FAI Quality Manager

Global warming is bogus. This just in from News Blaze: "Many have suggested that the Sun was responsible for these climatic changes and pointed out that low (or non-existent) solar activity often appeared during cooler periods on the planet.

It would now seem that NASA agrees with this finding. Thomas Woods, a solar scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder said "The fluctuations in the solar cycle impacts Earth's global temperature by about 0.1 degree Celsius, slightly hotter during solar maximum and cooler during solar minimum," and added "The sun is currently at its minimum, and the next solar maximum is expected in 2012.'"

I find it difficult to believe that seemingly intelligent people would have no idea where the basis is for so called global warming and all of its effects and delusions. Its interesting how folks just jump on the bandwagon, and never ask the first question as to the validity of the cause.

Global warming or Climate change or the various other claims it has ensued, are all part of one doctrine. The actual name if you care to study past the surface (you claim to be quality root cause analysts) is "Carbon metabolism : Global capitalism, climate change, and the biospheric rift". Its based entirely on Karl Marx theory of metabolic rift. Marx theory indicated that the selling of vegetables outside of England would create a depletion of the nutrients in the soil, which could not be repaired. The result would be total devastation to England's food supply and future ability to grow crops. Sound familiar?

Maybe you so called quality folks should do a bit of investigation prior to printing articles which are nothing more than the furtherance of Karl Marx communist propaganda. Biospheric rift just like its father metabolic rift, is a hoax. I find it difficult to believe that any professional worth his/her salt would allow themselves to be sucked into such soft minded, nonfactual, communist propaganda.

This is just those of the doctrine of hegel, forcing their political/religious views on the rest of us. The capitalists among us know what this type of legislation means. It will wipe out manufacturing jobs in the US, sending most of us to the welfare line.
Thanks but you can keep the change