Last week we asked our readers whether mining companies should publish their levels of greenhouse gas emissions, and respondent Art Winckers was succinct: "The answer is no. The setting of quotas is clearly stupid and counterproductive. It is nobody's business!
"I believe it is a good, timely question to ask," he went on, "but it oversimplifies the issue that has been too narrowly focused on CO2, which only represents a small fraction of the so-called greenhouse gases, with water vapour effect being more than twice as large.
"The yes vote at 45% is surprisingly high but is indicative of the current perception of the importance of the role of governments in our society as the only powers capable of saving our planet from doom and destruction, as forecasted by the likes of Suzuki and Gore who appear to have far more credibility than they deserve.
"We can not live on this planet without greenhouse gases, water or CO2. When is this anti-industrial paranoia going to stop? Our industry leaders are silent because they don't want to rock the boat and or do the politically incorrect thing.
"The CEO of Exxon is the only industry leader who has stated that the so-called science is not settled on the issue and that his company is in the business of producing and providing hydrocarbon fuels without apparently feeling guilty about it. That takes some courage these days!
"When is the Canadian Mining Journal going to ask the fundamental question what the real economic benefit is of greenhouse gas reductions over and above the direct benefit of becoming more energy efficient, which is the strategy of every company in its desire to become more competitive?
"Market forces of supply and demand will take care of these energy problems very nicely without government intervention, which always distorts reality," Winckers concluded.
Frequent correspondent Al Willy waded into the discussion: "By making public their 'greenhouse gas' emissions, those mining companies are making a yes vote on the subject of global warming. Despite thousands of 'scientists' voting yes for CO2 causing global warming and despite millions backing the rally (if 50 million people say a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing), there appear to be a number of paleoclimatologists and associates making the claim that the scientific debate is far from over.
"I know that we [the mineral industry] are seeking to get the public on our side, so on the political path, perhaps revealing the 'greenhouse gas' emission levels would be an astute move. However, as a scientist, it certainly frustrates me to see a non- or partial truth being supported," he wrote.
We at CMJ do have our fans, and we are always happy to hear from them, too. Especially Ray Riley who wrote about the same editorial, "Excellent article! Good approach. Your conclusion is right on the money!" Thank you, Ray.
Comments