We’re repeatedly told that unavoidable environmental catastrophe is now assured based upon President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate treaty. Really? It’s time someone called a spade a spade. The scaremongers’ unsubstantiated claims are intended to panic us into doing things we wouldn’t otherwise do. They want us to force reductions in U.S. energy consumption which will inevitably reduce our standard of living. Energy is progress. Sadly, those efforts will have no actual effect on the climate.
Even if we accept that human produced CO2 is a problem, (although a vast and growing body of evidence shows that it is not), neither the U.S, nor even the world can possibly reduce CO2 emissions enough to make any meaningful difference. For instance, one volcanic eruption can emit far more CO2 than the entire U.S. does annually.
The Paris Treaty seeks a 50 percent reduction in global CO2 emissions and at least an 80 percent reduction in U.S. CO2 emissions by 2050. This is literally impossible to achieve. Let’s review the numbers.
Global CO2 emissions in 2014 totaled 35,270 million metric tons (MMT). China and India emitted 36 percent combined, while the U.S., Europe, Russia and Japan account for another 34percent. The entire rest of the world combined emits 30 percent of global CO2 as they are mostly “developing nations.” Since China, India and other developing nations are allowed by the Paris accord to actually increase their CO2 emissions, they will continue to do so as they strive to feed their populations and industrialize.
Therefore, even if the U.S., Europe, Russia and Japan all cut their emissions by 100 percent, it would only amount to 11,900 MMT, nowhere near the 17,635 MMT reductions the treaty calls for. It simply isn’t going to happen despite our most valiant efforts.
For the U.S. to cut 80 percent of its CO2 emissions would require closing 43 percent of all electrical generation, removing 208 million cars from the roads, plus deep cuts in all other sectors. How will we travel to work? Electric vehicles require electricity. Our standard of living would plummet. Our economy would grind to a halt. Are you willing to go without electricity or a car or both? Would you enjoy living like the pioneers did?
Fortunately, President Trump understands these numbers and is unwilling to force Americans to waste their time and money on efforts that can never succeed.
Deceiving Americans is the only way for this radical agenda to advance. Environmentalist Stephen Schneider told Discover magazine in 1989, “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we have. . . . Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” That says a lot; he admits they have to lie to be effective.
Besides, didn’t we all learn in elementary school that dinosaurs lived during a much hotter period on the planet? Didn’t wooly mammoths live in a subsequent period which was much colder than today? I don’t recall any cavemen driving SUVs or operating coal fired power plants way back during those extreme world-wide temperature swings in the past. Could it be that our climate naturally changes over time? While human actions may have some trivial effect, we are deceiving ourselves if we think we could actually control the climate.
Unfortunately, even for most people who should know better, it’s not the results that count, but the intentions of the advocates. As long as “they mean well” we mustn’t question their motives. What nonsense.
If someone were to stick a gun in your face and tell you to hand over $2,000, you would be outraged. But when hordes of “do gooders,” in some vain attempt to “save the planet,” force the closure of clean, cheap, reliable, coal-fired power plants, causing our energy bills to increase by $2,000 per year, we simply go along and compliment them on at least “doing something.” Unfortunately, it will do nothing except take money from your wallet.
Before you buy into these well-orchestrated deceptions, just ask yourself: Would I do this on my own without being forced to do so? Or, would the hundreds of billions we are wasting on schemes to address climate change be better spent on problems we can actually do something about?
The earth has adapted over millennia to a constantly changing climate. It will continue to adapt. We, on the other hand, must have the freedom and capitol necessary to implement the best solutions as we also adapt.
Russ Hendricks is director of governmental affairs for the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation. He can be reached at email@example.com.