Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Up, Up, and Away!
The global warming agenda is the same as the global cooling agenda from the 1970's: more government controls on the economy.
We were facing a new ice age in the mid-1970's. Time said so. Also, Newsweek said so.
Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.
Newsweek concluded:
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
Even "Mr. Spock" said so.
Oh, woe!
The global cooling hype skidded off the media highway in the early 1980's, so the promoters of more government controls over the economy switched effortlessly to global warming.
This agenda has also failed . . . magnificently.
Here are three graphs. One was produced by the Environmental Protection Agency. It shows the relentless rise in greenhouse gas emissions. In short, the governments of this world have been unable to do anything to reduce this output. That is because they have not really attempted to implement the agenda.
The second shows that two nations, China and the United States, produce 40% of this output. If China and the United States do not massively cut emissions, it does not matter in the slightest what the rest of the world does.
The third shows that China has increased its output of CO2 emissions on a gigantic basis. This will get much worse as the output per capita rises to match the U.S. rate. Meanwhile, the USA has reduced emissions only slightly -- nowhere near enough to offset China's increase.
Bloomberg comments:
About 7 percent of China's greenhouse gas emissions currently come from the transport segment, versus 28 percent in the U.S., according to data compiled by Bloomberg New Energy Finance from sources including U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Power generation accounts for almost half of China's air pollution, compared with a third in the U.S."Imagine China being like the U.S., with one-quarter of emissions coming from cars -- it would put huge pressure on the pledge to cap emissions," said Jun Ying, lead China energy specialist at BNEF in Beijing. "It's possible that China will have to slow the explosive growth in car ownership it saw in the past few years."
So, is car ownership slowing in China? Bloomberg reports:
The China Association of Automobile Manufacturers expects new-car sales to rise 8 percent to 21.3 million units, down from 9.9 percent in 2014 and barely ahead of the 7 percent growth forecast for the economy.
Conclusion: if the global warming theory is correct, then we are doomed. There will be a catastrophe. There is no reversal possible in time to avoid this. All the hoopla for 25 years has not reversed the relentless increase of emissions.
Fortunately, there is nothing to the theory. Over 31,000 scientists have said so.
So, global warmers have two options: (1) admit that they have been hoodwinked by scientists with a political agenda; (2) prepare to meet their doom.