CO2, Global Warming, Fighting Carbon, And Playing Into The Hands of the Nuclear Cartel

A reader commented-----

 I am quite amazed, Stock, by your downplaying of climate change because of our global activity. It comes very close to the denial of adverse effects of nuclear business by its apologists. I guess it is driven by the same psychological barrier: the inability to admits ones' own damaging activity.

Regarding climate change, let me elaborate.

1. There is no activity without consequence. It is impossible that our activity has zero effect. Only how much is up to debate. If you do not want to take it as fact, you can derive this from hundreds of years of physical experimentation. Including modern desert-to-agriculture forming experiments gone wrong or currently running dry (Death Sea level sinking fast, Aralsee drying up, deserting Spain). Lots of regional changes will inevitably lead to a global response.

2. Because of banker shills and politicians, the CO2 tax was never implemented in the way it was intended. Instead of providing an overall cost neutral incentive to reduce resource consumption, it was perverted to line the pockets of the biggest polluters. This was achieved by exempting these polluters from the payment of the CO2 tax. Instead they are given the certificates for free. However, the consumers of their products are charged fully. Tip your hat for the coal-smokers in Germany and elsewhere, because this scam is their invention.

3. Regarding CO2 as a greenhouse driver. Extremely powerful lasers (up to hundreds of kilowatts beam power) in the mid-infrared are constructed using CO2 as gain medium. Guess what? CO2 has strong interaction cross-sections with light at wavelengths around 10um. That is in the wavelength range of thermal radiation. As a result, a small amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is sufficient to provide a warm blanket.

By the way, the atmosphere contained nearly no CO2 at all after O2 producing bacteria consumed it up. For the first time in earths geological past, earth turned into an ice ball, literally. This period lasted for millions of years until volcanoes put enough greenhouse gases back into the atmosphere.

It would be prudent not to undermine your anti-nuclear stance by siding with deniers of the Anthropocene.

Kind regards,

Marcel Leutenegger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marcel, per item 1, "they" want to enslave us with $17T of debt in order to fight carbon.   Most of the data I trust does not show CO2 correlating with world temperatures, and most data shows that mankinds contribution to CO2 is very small, less than 1%.    So before accepting $17 Trillion of additional debt for slaves, the science would need to be very settled on what we are contributing, what affect that is having, what the costs will be to reduce carbon, and what the benefits will be.    These are all quite unclear, not justifying a massive investment.   Especially when that "investment" has enough lies surrounded it, and appears to be more likely a wealth transfer mechanism, as well as driving smaller companies out of business and giving more power and wealth the the mega-corporations, usually multi-national so they can simultaneously extract wealth from the USA and not pay any taxes.

2) Banker shills and politicians seem to be quite in power, so any tool we allow to come into existence will likely be corrupted to their benefit.   Reward new non CO2, with tax credits and such.   But do not extract wealth from others to reward the already well to do multinationals.

3) I understand the infrared capture idea.   But back to item 1, how much is our fault, what will be the cost to reduce, and the benefit.


Also you had noted: I guess it is driven by the same psychological barrier: the inability to admits ones' own damaging activity.

You may not be familiar with my writings or me, but more than half of my career consisted of energy conservation, as an AEE Certified Energy Manager.    My other focus has been on Solar Thermal and Electric.     Each project that I complete would be equal to ALL the energy used by my large solar trucks over the whole lifetime of the truck.    I make more than ALL my own electricity for other usage.      So in terms of my own "damaging activity" I take umbrage and issue with your statement.    

I had long been of the "opinion" that "of course mans activity is having a deleterious effect on the atmosphere"  but could never quantitize it.    Then when I crunched the real temperature data and found that "they" have been lying about the 18 year "pause", and then found more of the Hockey Stick shenanigans, then watched in real time as NOAA and the Met jiggered the temperature data....I became suspicious of the whole game.    

The CO2 meme plays directly into the hands of the nuke cartel.