Earth
Day 2012
Once
again we celebrate the short-sighted “we care about the planet”
rhetoric that is environmentalism.
Let
me say I have no objection to clean air and water. just as most
people have no such objection. However, there is clean and then
there is clean. A home with reasonable keeping—counters wiped down
with hot, soapy water, floors mopped when needed, vacuuming and
dusting are all reasonable housekeeping goals. A home where the
owners demand all surfaces be disinfected two or three time a day,
air filtered to the tiniest micron, radon abatement monitored on a
daily basis, water filtered to absolute purity, etc. is not
reasonable housekeeping unless you are so immune compromised you need
these measures. Living like the “boy in the bubble” in not
necessary nor desirable. Environmentalists want us to live like the
boy in the bubble—or more probably accurate, the unvaccinated,
purified air breathing, natural food and fiber boy in the bubble.
It
is no longer enough to work on cleaning the air—we have to purify
the entire atmosphere above the USA. An interesting caveat is the
fact that dirty, even filthy water and air in other countries is
okay. China can have gray skies and filthy water if it means the USA
has sterile air and water.
This
brings us to the selfish ethics of “saving the planet”. It is
now acceptable to play Columbus and take land from third world
countries, plant tree shrines and declare our goodness, greatness
even, for saving everyone from the blight of CO2. Companies note
that they pay for the land. So did Columbus, so did the European
settlers. Your children are taught that Columbus and Europeans
exploited the Indians. Then, they are told that taking farmland away
from poor farmers who don't know how to farm in the first place is
fine to save the planet and plant more trees. The land is no longer
good for farming organically, so Americans and other buy it very
cheaply and plant trees. That's somehow moral and Columbus wasn't?
I
would note that the farmland is “organic farmland that was
exhausted” according to the president of a company who proudly
steals farmland from Costa Rica to offset their CO2 emissions. The
environmentalists want organic farming, while buying up “exhausted
organic farm land”. Either the environmentalists are indeed trying
to starve as many people as possible (the fate of the Mayans after
combining organic farming and a drought...) OR they are lying about
wanting organic farming and are just going for controlling everyone's
existence. No one even considered sending fertilizer and advisors to
help improve the farming—just snatch the land and plant trees.
Sweet.
I
read in the paper for Earth Day that one should use a gas grill to
cut CO2 while grilling. Nonsense—grill on a windy day with an
electric grill and you'll produce no CO2 because we have a lot of
those tall white “save the planet” turbines. Electric grilling
is the eco-friendly thing to do. Everyone should have an electric
grill.
“Make
It Right”, Brad Pitt's solar home project has managed to build 75
homes in SIX years. A standard, pre-fab home comes out in less than
six months. So to save the planet, you have to be homeless for up to
six or eight years waiting for that solar house. You get to mingle
with the homeless folks, something you will NEVER see Brad Pitt do on
a long-term basis. Most environmentalists care deeply about people
and their plight because these people will never experience the
consequences of their beliefs. How many homes does Brad Pitt own?
More than one and he is part of urban sprawl, over-consumption and
outright greed according to most environmentalists.
Environmentalism
and Earth Day are not about saving the planet—they are about
control and destroying a way of life that most nations envy. They
target the poor (both here and abroad) and those unable to fight
back. It's about huge subsidies for wind and solar without
acknowledging the damage done by the extra mining, construction, and
maintenance needed for the shrines to Gaia. It's denial that wind
and solar are also not sustainable if one has to strip away billions
of tons of earth and reap rare earth metals, refine them with toxic
chemicals, use all kinds of toxic chemicals in manufacturing, etc
just to build one of the thousands of turbines required to produce a
tiny amount of electricity. There is no such thing as a truly
sustainable life style without draconian birth control requirements,
a small number of people in charge and the entire population lives by
the leader's rules. Even that will eventually fail—humans get
tired of being controlled. Resources run out due to drought and/or
cold. The only sustainable thing we have is our own ingenuity and
even that seems to be severely curtailed by controlling politics and
education.
So
for Earth Day, say thanks for a home, air conditioning, heating,
hospitals, farmers who aren't afraid to use fertilizer so millions
won't starve when the organic land gives out (and it becomes a tree
shrine), and all the other benefits of modern society. Earth Day is
about being responsible, scientific and reasonable, not fear, living
in terror of the next environmental crisis manufactured by people who
very often ignore their own preaching. Enjoy your high standard of
living and stop feeling guilty.
Here we are—Earth day 2011.
Expect it to be as shallow and contrived as those Earth Days of the past.
Save the planet—by turning off water while you brush your teeth and use curly light bulbs. Cover every open space with those “free” energy generators, windmills and solar panels. Thank goodness Americans cannot do math or understand science. If anyone actually could calculate the percentage of water saved by not running water while brushing teeth, it would likely be far less than a tenth of percent of the water used in any hour in the USA. The curly light bulbs may save a few dollars a year on your electric bill (while adding mercury to the landfill if tossed out and not recycled) and last 9 years if you only turn them on for 3 hours a day with some brands, but compare the perhaps 300 to 400 watts per hour saved to the millions of watts used by businesses, street lights, etc and the impact is pretty much irrelevant. Belief in “free” energy should have gone the way of alchemy, but apparently government subsidies can keep anything alive.
For those of now saying “every little bit helps”, no, it may not. There is a point at which a change is so infinitesimal as to be meaningless. For example, saving $2 per month at 4% interest for 45 years yields approximately $3500 dollars in a retirement fund. Can you really say that makes an impact? If you eat 3000 calories per day and cut 20, is that better than doing nothing? If your boat is filling with water, do you bail water with a 20 ounce bottle? In an absolute sense, yes, these make a difference. But none will ever matter in a practical sense. It’s all just a way to make people feel as if they are contributing—a feel-good solution with no value.
So what then do we do to “save the planet”? First, does it need saving? Second, even if we think the planet needs saving, can that be accomplished?
In spite of numerous claims of consensus on global warming, there truly is not consensus. There are many scientists who disagree. Consensus is generally achieved by narrowly defining who qualifies to have an opinion. Not a really scientific criteria, though it works politically. Actual support by the man on the street seems to be fading also as winter makes a return to many parts of the world. While one hard winter does not disprove climate change (and does not tell us where the change came from if there really is one), it does serve to make people question the idea.
Let’s assume for the sake of discussion, there does exist AGW. How do we stop it? Consider for a moment how monumental the task of stopping a significant portion of “greenhouse gases”? The most effective way to decrease greenhouse gases and actually solve many environmental problems is a dying or sick economy. The fewer people working, the less manufacturing there is going on, the less construction, etc. It is extremely effective in stopping the alleged causes of AGW and much of the environmental illnesses of the earth. Now, ask yourself—do you want to save the planet? Are you willing to trash the economy to succeed? Is it likely China and India will agree to trash their economies to make sure this works? There is no possible way to make an economic downturn purposely happen worldwide without frightening possibilities of wars and a return to darker times (pun intended). While this would undoubtedly please many of the more liberal environmentalists, creating a deliberate downturn at any time in the near future seems unlikely. While socialism and rampant spending have cooled the economies of several countries, even bankruptcy did not significantly cool the world manufacturing industries.
While the Climate minister of England is telling Englanders the days of electricity at the flip of a switch are over might be accepted in England (because England is going to use renewable energy sources no matter what) I doubt Americans are going to calmly accept that their $5000 HDTV will only work on random days when the TV station has electricity and so does the TV owner. We are living in an industrial age—only a massive natural disaster will change that. Or, if the alarmists are right, the entire situation is self-correcting. It warms up, floods and famines occur, people die and the earth recovers. Problem solved. (While it may sound flippant, this is reality. Humans tend to overestimate their ability to control each other and nature. We are not a species that is given to extreme cooperation like maybe ants. We’re more wolves—trying for the alpha position and at times deciding we can take on a herd of buffalo all alone and win. Often nature solves the problems for us because we will not and probably cannot do what it takes. We often just don’t have that kind of knowledge.)
So what do we do for earth day? Forget the light bulbs, water running, etc. Maybe recycle a bit more, save some landfill space. Consider what you value the most—a thriving economy, lights, running water, or wilderness. A newspaper article this week encouraged people to visit open and wild spaces to form an attachment. The more the attachment spreads—well, actually, that leads to overuse and altering of nature more rapidly. So how do we save the earth? Maybe check with the person responsible for ANWAR—a frozen wasteland with enough oil to keep America driving for years. Yet, with less than 2000 visitors per year and one science station and no economic benefits whatsoever, the place is untouchable. The method used to create and basically make holy this place could definitely change the path of the USA. Protecting a frozen wasteland while Americans pay $4 per gallon for gas and risk another economic meltdown—that’s a world changer.
You can decide what kind of world changer…….
