Climate Change??

It’s back… ”climate change is the greatest threat to our planet and to humanity.”  If only America could rid itself of those last 15 fossil fuel electric generating plants and save the universe!  This has been the mantra ever since good ole Al Gore released “An Inconvenient Truth” predicting the ice on the polar caps was melting, the polar bears were doomed, and in just 12 years the planet might cease to exist…Oh my! Today when questioned about his predictions, Al either cannot or refuses to give an explanation.  Why not, Al?  After all you portrayed yourself as a subject-matter expert.  It certainly gave his pocketbook a big boost, won an Oscar for a movie he produced on the subject, and even was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Still, as “An Inconvenient Truth” found its way into classrooms around our country, not everyone agreed to the immediacy of its viewing by school children. Significant scientific errors were found in the Al Gore documentary, and lawsuits followed with claims that “in the hands of a talented politician and communicator it was being used to make a political statement and to support a political program. That the departures from the mainstream arose in the context of alarmism and exaggeration in support of political theses.”

Following this rebuttal, and several others, an article printed in 2015 edition of Heartland, clearly states that President Obama’s EPA Czar, Gina McCarthy stood before a Senate hearing committee and told the truth. Call it a Biden type gaffe.  McCarthy “disclosed that the Agency’s recently announced restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions had nothing to do with reducing pollution.  Instead, the EPA imposed restrictions because agency staff believe that imposing expensive renewable energy on the electricity marketplace will stimulate the economy.”

Let’s look at how many fossil fuel plants are in the world today and where they are.  With the plants in operation and projected plants being built, there are a total of 5,615 coal using energy plants. With China being the major source with 3,534 plants in that country.

This proves the point.  Whatever the USA does or doesn’t do regarding CO2 is meaningless unless the rest of the world reduces their coal-fired plants.  But this has broader implications.  As we are fully aware, energy and water are necessary to our economy.  We are contributing to our economic decline by purchasing cheap solar panels from China and India.  The US produces none or few.  Solar and wind are sorely deficient in the energy game.  “The whole ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change gambits’ by Democrats are to create a supposedly sound, scientific basis to justify a federal government power-grab and the passage of MORE laws to increase taxes and increased control of the privately owned power industry and its distribution.”   Period…end of story!

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest

1 thought on “Climate Change??”

  1. Joseph A. Smith

    I do agree “Solar and wind are sorely deficient in the energy game” and that US citizens, businesses, and corporations need to stop infusing foreign economies through domestic government incentives. Much of the climate change hype does seems to center around dramatic expansion of wind and solar as the clean solution to our energy needs. That, I believe, is a concept that has been padded and peddled by many with financial interests in said industry.

    The truth is wind and solar can contribute to our energy needs but it’s physically impossible (with the current technology) to sustain our energy needs with them. Don’t quote me on the numbers but I believe the current estimate is appx 2% of todays energy demands are met with wind and solar, the best we may ever be able to hope for could be as low as 15%. The issue is space and materials. Solar and wind operations require an enormous amount of real-estate for the amount of power they produce, not to mention their supply is intermittent and there is no practical way to store any surplus power generated. There are enormous environmental consequences to solar and wind energy production, among the worst of which is the toxic process and toxic waste associated with manufacturing and maintaining solar energy equipment and batteries for storage.

    All of that said, I think is it deplorable to say “Whatever the USA does or doesn’t do regarding CO2 is meaningless”. Yes, if the rest of the world does not follow our lead then the impact of US emissions regulations will have little effect on the rate of climate change. However, I don’t think that is the point to be made.

    Real leaders, the ones who check their own BS at the door for the good of those whom they lead, do what is right and set an example for others to follow regardless of who’s agenda it furthers. The USA needs to be that type of leader.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top