Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 16, 2014
To the 34% of American Adults Who Are “Worried a Great Deal” about “Global Warming”
Preface: A recent Gallup poll showed that 34% of American adults worried “a great deal” about “global warming”. This essay is written for that 34%.
Many well-intentioned people are desperately trying to stop climate change …
And yet they are proposing things that will put more C02 and methane into the air and otherwise do more harm than good.
Frack That
Many propose nuclear and fracking as a way to reduce carbon emissions.
In reality, scientists say that fracking pumps out a lot of methane … into both our drinking water and the environment.
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas: 72 times more potent as a warming source than CO2.
As such, fracking actually increases – rather than decreases – global warming.
Are Nukes the Answer?
It turns out that nuclear is not a low-carbon source of energy … and funding nuclear crowds out the development of better sources of alternative energy.
Mark Jacobson – the head of Stanford University’s Atmosphere and Energy Program, who has written numerous books and hundreds of scientific papers on climate and energy, and testified before Congress numerous times on those issues – notes that nuclear puts out much more pollution (including much more CO2) than windpower, and 1.5% of all the nuclear plants built have melted down. More information here, here and here.
Jacobson also points out that it takes at least 11 years to permit and build a nuclear plant, whereas it takes less than half that time to fire up a wind or solar farm. Between the application for a nuclear plant and flipping the switch, power is provided by conventional energy sources … currently 55-65% coal.
Scam and Trade
One of the main solutions to climate change which has long been pushed by the powers that be – cap and trade – is a scam. Specifically:
- The economists who invented cap-and-trade say that it won’t work for global warming
- Many environmentalists say that carbon trading won’t effectively reduce carbon emissions
- Our bailout buddies over at Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and the other Wall Street behemoths are buying heavily into carbon trading (see this, this, this, this, this and this).
As University of Maryland professor economics professor and former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission Peter Morici writes:
Obama must ensure that the banks use the trillions of dollars in federal bailout assistance to renegotiate mortgages and make new loans to worthy homebuyers and businesses. Obama must make certain that banks do not continue to squander federal largess by padding executive bonuses, acquiring other banks and pursuing new high-return, high-risk lines of businesses in merger activity, carbon trading and complex derivatives. Industry leaders like Citigroup have announced plans to move in those directions. Many of these bankers enjoyed influence in and contributed generously to the Obama campaign. Now it remains to be seen if a President Obama can stand up to these same bankers and persuade or compel them to act responsibly.
In other words, the same companies that made billions off of derivatives and other scams and are now getting bailed out on your dime are going to make billions from carbon trading.
War: The Number One Source of Carbon
The U.S. military is the biggest producer of carbon on the planet.
Harvey Wasserman notes that fighting wars more than wipes out any reduction in carbon from the government’s proposed climate measures.
Writing in 2009 about the then-proposed escalation in the Afghanistan war, Wasserman said:
The war would also come with a carbon burst. How will the massive emissions created by 100,000-plus soldiers in wartime be counted in the 17% reduction rubric? Will the HumVees be converted to hybrids? What is the carbon impact of Predator bombs that destroy Afghan families and villages?
The continuance of fighting all over the Middle East and North Africa completely and thoroughly undermines the government’s claims that there is a global warming emergency and that reducing carbon output through cap and trade is needed to save the planet.
I can’t take anything the government says about carbon footprints seriously until the government ends the unnecessary wars … all over the globe.
So whatever you think of climate change, all people can agree that ending the wars is important. (War also destroys the economy.)
Anyone who supports “humanitarian war” by the U.S. is supporting throwing a lot of carbon into the air.
Dumb as a Mongoose In Hawaii
Many scientists suggest “geoengineering” the Earth’s climate. But that could actually worsen climate change. It could also increase the risk of drought.
Moreover, geoengineering would increase ocean acidification and decrease available sunlight for solar power.
And once we started, we could never stop.
Some of the geoengineering proposals are downright nuts. For example, “government scientists are studying the feasibility of sending nearly microscopic particles of specially made glass into the Earth’s upper atmosphere to try to dampen the effects of ‘global warming.’ ” Others are currently suggesting cutting down trees and burying them. Other ways to geoengineer the planet are being studied and tested (and see this and this), involving such things as dumping barium, aluminum and other toxic metals into the atmosphere.
Remember, the mongoose was introduced to Hawaii in order to control the rats (which were eating the sugar cane used to make rum). It didn’t work out very well … mongeese are daylight-loving creatures while rats are nocturnal. So the mongeese trashed the native species in Hawaii, and never took care of the rats.
Similarly, the harm caused by many of these methods have not been thought through … and they could cause serious damage to our health and our ecosystems.
So – whatever you think about climate – you can obviously agree that we should approach climate change from the age-old axiom of “first, do no harm”, making sure that our “solutions” do not cause more damage than the problems.
So What’s the Answer?
If nuclear, fracking, cap and trade and geoengineering aren’t the answer, what is?
There are 3 main strategies which both climate activists and climate skeptics can agree on, because they have big upsides whether or not the Earth is warming:
(1) Reducing soot will quickly reduce melting of ice and snow. Reducing soot will be cheaper than the “decarbonation” which many policy-makers have proposed. And it would increase the health of millions of people worldwide
(2) Use specific smart combinations of solar, wind and geothermal energy
(3) Decentralize power generation and storage. That would empower people and communities, produce less carbon, prevent nuclear disasters like Fukushima, reduce the dangers of peak oil (and thus prevent future oil spills like we had in the Gulf), and have many other positive effects
We don’t need fascism to make this happen … We just need a sound plan.
10 Comments on "To the 34% of American Adults Who Are “Worried a Great Deal” about “Global Warming”"
orbit7er on Wed, 16th Apr 2014 6:31 pm
I am glad that reducing the endless Wars is mentioned here as it is almost always neglected not only by mainstream commentators but also Environmentalists like Greenpeace. The MAIN thing to do is the first rule of Ecological sustainability” “REDUCE!” Ending Wars, their pollution, destruction and the huge resources of trillions of dollars wasted on them is indeed the Number One item of reducing waste to reduce fossil fuel consumption. But number two is Auto Addiction which accounts for 70% of oil usage in the US and DIRECTLY accounts for 35% of greenhouse emissions! Unfortunately while high oil prices have dampened car sales and driving in the US and EU, China and India have gone whole hog into emulating Auto Addiction and getting more planet destroying private personal cars. The second best and FASTEST way to reduce greenhouse emissions is to run Green Transit instead of Auto Addiction. The US is the world’s worst offender in this regard even tho 79% of the population now lives in urbanized areas and a Brookings study showed that ALREADY 70% of Americans live within only 3/4th mile of a transit stop. The problem is that major Rail systems in the US do not run at all on weekends or offpeak hours, do not run Express along with Local service and lack the last mile connections.
Ironically in 2008 when the world economy crashed due to Peak Oil, in the US 150 transit systems were CUT just when people were crowding to use them with $4 per gallon gasoline!
The US Federal gas tax could be increased and much of that money used to provide operating subsidies to Green public transit that existing for decades before Reagan eliminated them.
Between 1942-45 when the US elite decided to redirect transit from auto addiction to Green public transit ridership quadrupled in just 3 years!
See http://transportrevolutions.info for more info on this and the Green Transit revolution we need…
DC on Wed, 16th Apr 2014 6:59 pm
Well said orbit7er.The gas-powered car, lies at the heart of just about every indust-capitalist pathology that exists.
u$ auto corporations are, not surprisingly, linked to war at the hip. GM, Ford, Chrysler all have military contracts and facilities to build amerikas 10 gallon per mile war-machines.
J-Gav on Wed, 16th Apr 2014 7:00 pm
I agree Orbit. Should some maintenance, extension and better management finally find their way into U.S. rail service, I’m sure we’d see another rebound in ridership – along with considerable carbon savings. That doesn’t seem to be much of a priority for the moment though, does it?
bobinget on Wed, 16th Apr 2014 7:21 pm
34% is actually good news. Recall that by the middle of Vietnam public opinion was only about 22% against the war. However… this is what’s called a ‘tipping point’.
from Wiki
The Law of the Few[edit]
“The Law of the Few”, or, as Malcolm Gladwell states, “The success of any kind of social epidemic is heavily dependent on the involvement of people with a particular and rare set of social gifts”.[3] According to Malcolm Gladwell, economists call this the “80/20 Principle, which is the idea that in any situation roughly 80 percent of the ‘work’ will be done by 20 percent of the participants”.[4] (see Pareto Principle
Davey on Wed, 16th Apr 2014 7:46 pm
Orbit, gav, and Deec, I totally agree about the auto age being the worst of man’s ages. Cars have ruined this earth and it is amazing in how short of a time frame. I will throw in the Tv as something that is ruining our spirit. I would love to see street cars, trains, and river travel return. Horses would be nice. We need to shrink this world. The Amish were so far ahead of us by understanding how the car would destroy community!
Makati1 on Thu, 17th Apr 2014 2:27 am
34% worry, but what percentage actually try to learn about it and do something about it? 1%, maybe. THAT is the problem today with everything. If you know the danger but don’t try to prevent or at least avoid it, then you deserve the results. IF 34% actually did something like shutting down the power plants, not allowing wars, and actually cutting their own consumption to basics, THEN they could change our direction. But, they won’t. Americans are complainers and whiners. Thy hang on to the fantasy that they are still the only true democracy on the planet and other dreams. You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned TV, Davey. It has destroyed our will to do anything or even think. Now back to your regular scheduled ‘programming’.
Philip on Thu, 17th Apr 2014 7:02 am
Put farm subsidies in place to make widespread urban farming profitable. There’s no better place to start! Locally grown food means less transportation, money stays in the community, employment expands while unemployment vanishes. 70% of hydrocarbons get left in the ground. Then these farmers expand onto remediated agricultural land that was formerly used and damaged by industrial agriculture.
Kenz300 on Thu, 17th Apr 2014 1:27 pm
We Could Power All 50 States With Wind, Solar and Hydro Washington’s Blog
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/solar-wind-mix-baseload.html
———————————-
Years of Living Dangerously Premiere Full Episode – YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brvhCnYvxQQ
Musher on Thu, 17th Apr 2014 5:28 pm
It’s too late – period. We have already passed the point of no return insofar as greenhouse gas emissions are concerned. Feedback loops are already ruining in full force beyond human control. Methane release from permafrost and formerly frozen methane hydrates are in a runaway mode. It takes roughly 40 years for the ghg released today to fully exert their influence on the climate. That means that even if we had the will to stop all ghg release today the climate would continue to warm for the next 40 years – and we do not have 40 yrs. for that to happen before things go to hell in a hand basket.
Kenz300 on Fri, 18th Apr 2014 12:28 am
Vote RepubliCONS out of office…… It is the only way to make progress……..