If you look at the recent (May 1, 2008 ?) edition of USA today, they have a story of/based on an article recently published in Geophysical Letters (here is the abstract:
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2007GL032887.shtml) about the CO2 emissions inventory. The big news is that China appears to have bumped the USA aside in terms of the biggest emitter of CO2 via burning fossil fuels. Actually, there is no pride in winning that award.....but, stuff happens.

But emitter and emissions are words that don't have much punch to them. So, since the Supreme Court has actually said that CO2 emissions can be considered air pollution by our EPA, let's rephrase this a bit. First, a definition - CO2 pollution is the result of burning fossil fuels. So when you are sitting around the campfire and throwing some wood on the fire, you may be fending off the mossies, noseeums, blackflies and worse with campfire smoke, but this is not CO2 pollution. But burning gasoline in that 12 mpg camper as you drive down the road is, as is using electricity made by that old but cheap coal burner in your area. The fact that 1/3 of the wood was made with CO2 pollution (plants don't care where they get their CO2 from) is there (as long as its a young tree), but we'll let it slide. We'll use Molly Ivins' "Rule of Holes" - when you are in a hole and want to get out, stop digging!

So, back to the headline in question. The USA is no longer the world's worst CO2 polluter - China is...just don't go down to Walmart and buy something if you decide to celebrate the fact that we are no long the worst in the world, at least in that aspect. It would have been nice if we got out of the proverbial dunce corner by being smart, innovative and efficient = smart, but instead, China just burned more coal, and we bought some of their crap that was made directly or indirectly from the burning of that coal. And there are people in this country who want to, once again, be #1 - in CO2 pollution.

Anyway, for the article in question, it probably would have had a bit more emphasis if the used the term CO2 polluter instead of CO2 emitter. It's the pollution term that better describes the consequences of using our atmosphere as the infinite garbage dump. Well, it is NOT infinite. And there are other ways to make the electricity which seems to be the cause of about 40% of that CO2 pollution throughout the world. And we've a lot of work to do (and plenty of people willing to do it, especially if they could make a living at it) to fix this undesirable situation. That would sure beat having to pull merc duty in IraqNam, or the lower paid profession of someone in the US Armed Forces doing many, if not even more, of the same things. And even if you escaped that hellhole in one piece, more or less intact, I bet installing wind turbines feels better than defending the Empires of Oil, and whoever runs those...enterprises.

So, to quote Larry The Cable Guy...."Get 'er done!" How can that be argued with?