Tuesday, December 8, 2009

The Copenhagen Climate Conference and My Snow Blower

Last night, we got the first significant snowfall of the season. This gave me the opportunity to try out my nifty new snow blower. Meanwhile, world leaders are congregating in Copenhagen to discuss what to do about global warming, global cooling, climate change, or whatever they're calling it today (It's hard to keep up).

It is clear to me that the ultimate goal of the conference attendees is nothing more than self-enrichment, accumulation and centralization of power, and the return of us commoners to the stone age. These clowns seem to believe that the use of fossil fuel (petroleum, coal, and natural gas) is evil and all our energy needs can be met by a countryside littered with solar cells and wind turbines. They seem to think that I can remove the global-warming-caused snow from my driveway with a couple of solar cells! If that doesn't work, they expect me to move that snow with a shovel made of reeds (all snow shovels on the market are made through the exploitation of fossil fuel).

It gets even better. My aged concrete driveway is cracking and otherwise deteriorating due to the harsh winters caused by global warming. The creation of the cement to make concrete requires high heat from fossil fuel. Mixing that cement with gravel and water to make concrete requires fossil fuel. Delivering it to my home to pour a new driveway requires fossil fuel. Hauling away the old broken up driveway requires fossil energy. Since the Copenhagen conference attendees want to eliminate fossil fuel and since Henry Waxman and others in American politics (who know nothing about science and economics) want to tax fossil energy out of existence, I may soon be without a paved driveway -- let alone paved or snow-free streets in my town. (Why are political morons mostly from the land of fruits and nuts?)

How will the United States will look once nature's cyclical global cooling kicks in and no one will be able to afford to heat their homes because of carbon taxes introduced to prevent global warming?

When you need to get some real work done, you must have fossil fuel or a nuke (including to manufacture solar- and wind-power systems). There is no substitute.

What's the big deal about eliminating the use of fossil energy? It is claimed that the carbon emissions from my snow blower are what's causing climate change! Lets take a look at some basic grade-school science:

The atmosphere is made up of nitrogen (about 78 percent), oxygen (about 21 percent) and several other gases (less than two percent). The planet-killing carbon dioxide comprises only 0.038 percent of the atmosphere (only 3.4 percent of which is man made)! So, man could double his CO2 output and the effect on the atmosphere's CO2 levels would be insignificant by any rational measurement.

Here's some more grade-school science. Animals (that includes us humans) inhale air and use the oxygen content to support life and then exhale CO2. Carbon dioxide is a natural product of life! Plants consume that atmospheric CO2 (they must have it to live) and exhale oxygen. If man's production of CO2 is a pollutant (as claimed by environmentalists and even the courts and government agencies), then, by the same logic, surely oxygen -- the waste left over from photosynthesis -- is also a pollutant.

It is alleged that my SUV puts out about 19 tons of carbon dioxide annually, based on the assumption of 15,000 miles per year. Hmmm. Gasoline weights about 6.25 pounds per gallon. My Ford Bronco travels about 12 miles per gallon of gas. So, I burn about 1,250 gallons (7,812.5 pounds) of fuel per year. How in the world can my Ford produce 19 tons of carbon dioxide when I only feed it 3.9 tons of gasoline which is only part carbon (gasoline molecules also contain hydrogen)?

Having no desire to live in my own filth or that of others, I also naturally oppose any unnecessary pollution of our soil, air and water (even including the mucus and cigarette butts cads spit onto the streets and sidewalks). I abhor pollution (such as the 130+ tons of trash left behind at Obama's inaugural by his adoring worshipers) as much as anyone. But, to presume that man with his CO2 is more powerful in affecting weather or climate (no, they aren't the same thing) than ol' Mr. Sun and variations in Earth's orbit is the epitome of arrogance and manifests profound ignorance of basic science.

When people ignore or don't understand history, science, economics, mathematics, or human nature, politicians and other grifters (eg, environmentalists) can sell 'em anything -- including global warming. When a few people start to catch on to the scam, the politicians and other grifters fool 'em again by simply changing the name to something like global cooling or climate change. Fortunately for the politicians and grifters, at least half the people never catch on to the game.

The real direction the Copenhagen Conference and the anti-energy campaign is taking is back to the stone age when our ancestors did not have the technology we enjoy today which relies totally on reliable, abundant, and cheap fossil-fuel and nuclear energy. Self-proclaimed environmentalists generally seem to be people who don't know about science, don't understand economics, and won't do the math.

1 comment:

  1. Maybe when Al Gore and his cronies start walking or riding a bicycle when they travel about, we'll be inclined to believe that THEY believe in this global warming stuff. But even that would not convince me that mankind is the root cause of the world's climate changes. I wonder how many of our ancestors and their wood-burning campfires it took to wipe out the last ice age! And your point about your SUV spewing 19 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere when it burns < 4 tons of gasoline is choice!