METHANE As our friend, this natural gas is as useful as carbon dioxide. But it has turned into an enemy because we have produced twice as much as we need, and excess is making it impossible for atmosphere to disintegrate other dangerous gases.

CFCs As our friend, when chlorofluorocarbons are in lower atmosphere, they are efficient heat absorbers. But when they rise up, they become our enemies because they go to destroy earth’s protective umbrella, ozone.

NITROUS OXIDE As our friend, this laughing gas like CFCs absorbs heat when it is in lower atmosphere. But when it goes up, it destroys ozone.

OZONE This gas is our friend when it is in high atmosphere where it filters deadly ultraviolet radiation, cause of skin cancer. But when it comes down, it becomes our enemy.

Since these greenhouse gases are being added into atmosphere daily from use of fossil fuel, how can danger of mass poisoning be avoided?

Well, Homo Sapien smart has already dreamed up solutions:

Man will harness solar power to replace conventional ones.

Man will invent clean burning hydrogen fuel in place of hazardous petroleum products.

Man will make a gigantic parasol to shield earth from sun’s dangerous rays.

Man will reforestate globe to suck up excess carbon dioxide.

Man will fire up giant laser rays to kill CFCs before they damage ozone.

Man will use solar power satellites to collect solar energy from space, and send it down as microwaves, or laser beams, for use in place of burning fossil fuels.

Man will …. That’s enough. Thank you man wise. Clap for yourself!

Let’s hope that you will fix greenhouse gases before they cover your grave!

Copyright © 2002, all rights reserved

About Author:

ARTHUR ZULU, The Most Controversial Writer in World, is author of best - selling book, HOW TO WRITE A BEST-SELLER. Download your copy and FREE excerpt at : http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/10975. For FREE writing helps, mailto : controversialwriter@yahoo.com

There’s a bigger lesson here, though. Continuing development during droughts demonstrates that conservation on one level may only serve to encourage waste and exploitive use of resources on another level. Consider that when we recycle, instead of reducing need for landfills, we might just be opening up more acreage for Wal-Marts and subdivisions. When we push for more public transportation, instead of alleviating congestion, we might just be creating more available volume capacity for land speculators.

The problem may be that we see conservation only as a personal choice or fashion. But to be truly effective, we might have to apply it throughout all levels of society, not as fashionable behavior, but as internalized ethic. We might need to think beyond personal recycling and every-third-day-watering to such notions as conservation of land use, conservation of quality of life, conservation of surface and ground water, and conservation of climate. We might need to value restraint in physical expansion, restraint in personal transportation, restraint in gratification, and restraint in resource consumption.

Do we dare consider freezing addition of new water taps and making future taps conditioned on sustainable supplies? What a bold notion: to use conservation not to put squeeze on individuals to cough up resources for industry, but to make our lives easier.

It’s always difficult to draw a line at a particular point, but that doesn’t mean a line shouldn’t be drawn at some point. After all, west’s land and resources are not unlimited. If we use them up, then what? Have we reached point where we consider drawing that line? While there are still some things left to conserve?