This is the problem with any suggestion that we voluntarily limit our carbon-emitting activities. If we take the argument to its logical conclusion, we should a

This is the problem with any suggestion that we voluntarily limit our carbon-emitting activities. If we take the argument to its logical conclusion, we should all stop reproducing altogether. It's the 'dead great-grandfather principle' [0]: "He’s much greener than you, you cannot compete with that. If you move into a smaller apartment, your grandfather is in a very, very small apartment. It’s underground, there’s no lighting, there’s no heating, he doesn’t have any broadband." I don't disagree with you or the parent comment at all, I absolutely believe that we should be limiting our carbon emissions. But at its core this is a philosophical problem as much as a scientific one. To what extent do we have the 'right' to change the climate? Should we have a per-person carbon allowance? A global one child policy? [0] http://www.wired.com/2011/02/transcript-of-reboot-11-speech-by-bruce-sterling-25-6-2009/ http://www.wired.com/2011/02/transcript-of-reboot-11-speech-...