>>3
I don't think there's anything wrong with my writing style aside from the last sentence.
I should have clarified in that there are little to no economic incentives for Libertarians to control their carbon emissions, and it is something the Government must do (via Kyoto Protocol and the EU's Carbon Currency).
Anarcho-Capitalism is going nowhere fast when someone gets a Nobel Peace Prize for advocating Environmental Policies.
This is why the Neo-Cons affiliated with heavy pollution industries are BAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWing so much.
I hope my writing style doesn't get in the way here, but I remember one Supreme Court Case called "Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife" where the SCOTUS were BAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWing over the idea that United States Corporations must be held to United States Environmental policies in places outside of United States jurisdiction (I believe the case was concerning a plant in India).
The SCOTUS inevitably ruled in favor of the fat fuck corporate pollution yes men.