Tag: CO2

Ten Fundamental Climate Questions the Media and Climate Alarmists Can’t or Won’t Answer

Here are 10 fundamental questions that climate alarmists never answer.

➊ You claim that the Earth is overheating. That it’s “too hot.” So, what is the correct global mean surface temperature (GMST) for life on Earth and why? 

Please provide a numerical answer. Use units and round it to the nearest tenth of a degree Celsius. Then, explain why that value is ideal and cite evidence to justify your answer.

➋ What is the correct atmospheric CO₂ level for life on Earth?

What is best to optimize our agricultural productivity? 

What CO₂ level will make da weatha less scary? 

Give your answer as an exact value as a mole fraction or volume percentage, and then explain why that value is ideal.

➌ What exactly makes CO₂ “pollution”?

The EPA considers CO₂ to be a pollutant, legally speaking, under the Clean Air Act, and their scientific justification is simply that, it “…𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠 𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑓𝑎𝑟𝑒.”

https://epa.gov/climate-change/endangerment-and-cause-or-contribute-findings-greenhouse-gases-under-section-202a

That’s pretty ambiguous.

Because by that measure, water vapor should also be classified as a “pollutant” because it’s also a “greenhouse gas” (GHG) — it’s also the most abundant and potent GHG; it absorbs a wider spectrum of IR wavelengths than CO₂. 

So, what actually makes CO₂ pollution?

➍ Why are temperature departures from 1850-1900 climate conditions deemed as the human welfare control knob given that the overall human condition has never been better than it is today? How is was climate during the end of the Little Ice Age — the coldest period in the last 10,000-years — preferable to today’s? On what account was the weather more benign? By what measure? Be specific. Tell me how the climate was supposedly less dangerous in the 17-19th centuries.

➎ The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that President Biden signed into law in 2022 was popularized as the “biggest climate bill in history,” but ever since the bill was signed, climate alarmists insist climate change has only gotten worse.

Why are we not seeing the bill work its magic?  

https://axios.com/2024/07/21/biden-legacy-election-2024

➏ If we spend $75 trillion to decarbonize the economy by 2050, by how much will it reduce the GMST by the end of the century? Please provide your answer to the nearest tenth of a degree Celsius and show your calculations.

What does the perfect climate look like? How will we know when we get there? By what measure?

➐ The estimated cost of net zero by the year 2050 in the U.S. is $75 trillion ($3 trillion per year), according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. 

That’s a hefty price tag. 

And with ~260 million adult taxpayers, it would cost each of us $288,461.54 to get to “net zero emissions” by the target date. That’s 3-6-years’ worth of peoples’ salaries.

Are you willing to shell out that money, or do you just expect that everyone else will foot the bill for you? 

Secondly, if you don’t know the answer to question six, then are we supposed to just spend that $75 trillion and see what happens? 

➑ If “combating climate change” is a global concerted effort, why do China and India get a free pass to continue emitting carbon dioxide without bound?

➒ Why are you so vehemently opposed to the deployment of nuclear power? It is the safest, most sustainable “carbon-free” energy technology and without the compliance regulations, isn’t expensive when compared to solar PV and wind, which are inefficient, intermittent, costly add-ons to existing electricity generation sources.

➓ If humans are a parasite to the Earth since we are destroying it, why then are you worried that climate change could wipe us all out? Wouldn’t that be better for Earth? Why don’t you be the change you want to see and “net zero” yourself?

source

The energy ideology on which the U.S. has ‘wasted’ $1.5 TRILLION

I post this as I listen to Ford losing $5.5 billion on EV’s as they transition to hybrid because no one wants them. They’d rather have a ground shaking V-8 with a straight exhaust in their truck or a real Mustang, but no. Ford Loses $44,000 On Every EV Sells As It Switches To Hybrids

Now this:

We are often told that wind and solar, if not cheaper, are at least cost competitive with fossil fuels. Dead wrong! Wind or solar costs around five times more per megawatt hour compared to, for example, natural gas.

We are told that wind and solar will save us from a climate catastrophe. If there is a looming climate catastrophe, the only thing that will save us is nuclear power. Wind and solar are incredibly expensive methods of reducing CO2 emissions. The more wind and solar you build, the cost of removing CO2 increases disproportionately.

The U.S. has wasted $1.5 trillion on wind and solar and for that money only a little more than 10% of our electricity comes from wind and solar.

Fossil fuels are not dirty. Modern natural gas or coal plants are environmentally pristine. CO2 is not a pollutant, but an aerial plant food that is greening the Earth. CO2 makes plants grow faster with less water.

Wind or solar electricity is not worth what it costs to create it. It is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. That is a generally accepted economic principle.

If the government requires a utility to purchase some amount of electricity at some price, that is not a free market.  That is central planning. Central planning has a role, but it rarely works as well as the voluntary exchange of goods and services. Central planning creates unexpected twists and turns and often results in low productivity.

More on the lies they’ve been telling us about Green energy and the Green New Deal nonsense

Climate Change Liars Being Exposed – NOAA Graph Shows CO2 Is Not the Villain

Since the 1970s, we’ve been told CO2 is the villain that causes most climate change. NOAA obliterated that with a graph.

“The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere today is comparable to around 4.3 million years ago when sea level was about 75 ft higher than today, the average temp was 7 degrees F higher than in pre-industrial times, & large forests occupied areas of the Arctic that are now tundra,” NOAA reports.

So, there were no people, the sea level was higher, and there were forests on the now-frozen tundra.

more

NASA – CO2 Now NOT Behind Climate Change

I was glad to hear that the truth couldn’t be hidden behind the curtain. I was equally disturbed that the same idiots now have a new villain, clouds. Of all the nonsense.

I guess that CO2 is running out of steam because the truth that it is a plant nutrient is not the culprit. We all know the real reason for it is to grift money of the government and billionaires, or to grift it into the pockets of the politicians.

Anyway, here’s your study with charts and facts courtesy of WUWT, a blog you should follow for actual climate facts.

There is a lot more than this, but you get the drift. They are making it up like they have all along.

CO2 is Innocent but Clouds are Guilty.  New Science has Created a “Black Swan Event”**

Our tax dollars have been at work with NASA for the last 20+ years putting satellites in orbit to detect and measure the “CO2 effect” on Global Warming, GW.  After 20 years, the CERES satellite (and others) has discovered that cloud reduction is the major effect on GW for those 20 years. Two papers published in 2021 reach this conclusion, Dübal and Vahrenholt,  (2) and. Loeb, Gregory et al  (3)  These new papers do claim some sign of CO2 effect (and other greenhouse gases) on GW; but the papers show the dominate effect on GW for those 20 years was the cloud reduction effect (albedo reduction- warming).   This paper will show that the observed cloud reduction will account for all the GW in those 20 years and back to 1975, leaving no GW left over for the CO2 effect on GW. Cloud reduction is albedo reduction, (albedo: color of the earth, black, 0.0, is hot and white, 1.0, is cool).  Another recently published paper (2021) by Goode et al (4) measuring earth’s albedo from moon shine also reports the same reduction in albedo as the CERES data of both Dübal and Loeb:  one can only conclude that for 20 years of data the albedo change is real.   Why is albedo change important?  Because the IPCC theory of CO2 effect on GW assumes that the earth’s albedo has been constant (or not changed much) and CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) thru Radiative Forcing effect GW.  The resent satellite data says this is not true.   Cloud cover changes are best documented at “Climate and Clouds”(5) with links to the data source at “Climate Explorer” (6).  “Climate and Clouds” conclude that cloud change only accounts for 25% of the GW.  This paper will show an improved analysis of “Climate and Clouds” data agrees with the CERES data of Dübal and Loeb that cloud reduction is accounting for most if not all of the warming over CERES’s 20 years.  Figures 1 and 2 show a graphic representation of what Dübal and Loeb observed in the CERES data and what was expected from IPCC Radiative Forcing, RF, theory.  The shape (slopes) of the observed and expected are entirely different but the increase in the missing energy (Earths Energy Imbalance, EEI) is the same.  The missing energy, EEI, is used to warm the earth though the energy balance equation:

And more that there is no climate emergency, (only a money emergency):

Crickets Farting, Take That WEF And Other Global Warming Fools

I couldn’t let this one pass.

Hey! Greenies! Taking good care of yourselves? Watching your diet? Exercising? Taking those probiotics to strengthen your gut biome and digestion? Well, cut it out! You’re part of the problem here.

Among the critters that metabolically produce CO2 are bacteria. As far as I can find out, every creature on Earth that has a mouth has a gut. And nearly every gut’s biome contains bacteria, some more densely populated or more varied than others. Those bacteria give off CO2 as part of simply living. That CO2 escapes the bacteria’s host’s body during the process of elimination, usually through an anal orifice.

Everything farts, though it might not have been noticed (heard, smelt, or seen wafting up from a bird’s hind end on a chilly morning) in some species yet. The animal is not the source of the excreted CO2; it’s the bacteria that live inside the animal. You, me, the cows, the crickets, all God’s creatures need to fart. Especially we humans, as we have more bacteria living inside each of us than there are dollars in our $30+ trillion national debt.

There is more here at the American Thinker

Beef cattle graze rangelands and pastureland, and enrich the soil as they go. Upfront infrastructure inputs include fence posts and wire, except on federal rangelands where often none is required. Other expenses include either gas-sipping ATVs or a few horses, saddles, and bridles for moving them. Taking them to market needs the one-time use of a truck and trailer. Crickets, on the other hand, require climate-controlled enclosed space and energy-heavy 24/7 HVAC operations from egg through carcass. No fresh air, sunlight, or free-ranging for them.

Total feed consumption, over the life of a beef animal from all sources, is about 25 lbs per pound of flesh produced. Pastured/ranged beef cattle that are finished on grain consume about 2.5 lbs of grain per lb of flesh. Grass-fed beef is becoming an increasingly popular choice and involves none of the steps involved in planting, fertilizing, watering, growing, harvesting, processing, or transporting grain for food. Crickets consume around 2 lbs of grain-based feed for every pound of cricket produced—not a significant difference from grain-finished beef, but quite a big one compared to the grass-fed.

And consider the relatively simple course of turning slaughtered beef into steaks, roasts, and hamburgers. Beef is handled, with hands, throughout the process. Crickets are washed clean, roasted, dried, chopped, and either powdered or emulsified depending on the desired product. Crickets are sometimes frozen before processing. Alternatively, they are roasted alive, ouch. Raw cricket powder sells for $40-$50 per lb.

They’ve been trying to explain away CO2, globull warming, climate change and other nonsense. I know it’s a ruse to get free government money. I know the government tactics to create a crisis and then try to solve it. This is not that. It is a money grab. Look at Al Gore selling his TV station to the Oil Producing Al Jazeera, that doesn’t believe in climate change like all of the smart people who see through this.

The reason I pick on the crickets is the WEF wants us to eat bugs.