***** ***** ***** ***** Plants "eat" CO2 gas of air. Plants need CO2 to live and grow. Animals depend on plants for their survival. Some misguided people, including certain environmentalists who should know better, vilify CO2. Whatever for? CO2 is clean, natural and ecologically essential. Besides, CO2 gas is actually a SCARCE component of the atmosphere. Less than 0.04% of air is CO2.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
This is where you stick random tidbits of information about yourself.
|
|
|
|
HOAX: Continued Villification of CO2, and Mandated Purchasing of Carbon Credits
|
|
| |
Saturday, February 10, 2007
From 2002 to 2007, this blog appeared under the title HOAX: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE KYOTO ACCORD/PROTOCOL IN CANADA
by: Paavo Siitam *
Preface
No part of the Kyoto Accord, or Kyoto Protocol (Kyoto), should ever have been adopted (neither ratified nor implemented) by the Parliament of Canada. Kyoto was based on bad, inaccurate and even fraudulent science (See references, below RE "Broken Hockey Stick", etc.) Thankfully, during 2007, the Harper government seems to have turned its back on Kyoto. Despite this positive direction, it is still needlessly ambivalent about carbon dioxide, CO2, gas -- the good, clean, ecologically essential, and SCARCE component of air.
Primordial Origins of the Atmosphere
Planet Earth is ~5 billion years old. Helium and hydrogen made up the first atmosphere of the planet. These light gases were lost quickly when Earth was new and hot. Ancient Earth cooled gradually. Eventually, though, surface rock hardened. Volcanic eruptions continued, spewing forth water vapour, and CARBON DIOXIDE, CO2, gas. After about three billion years, the Earth had cooled enough to condense much of the water vapour. In fact, so much water collected that an enormous ocean formed. Tidal pools became enriched with compounds of various minerals leached from the rocks, including various ions of N, P, K, Ca, Fe, Mg ... In time, bacteria-like forms of life came about, and evolved. Some of these microorganisms helped to add nitrogen, N2, gas to air. About 4 billion years ago, one category of such simple, single-celled living things had the ability to capture energy from sunlight. These little autotrophs were the earliest, and simplest of the ancestral plants; the blue-green algae. Because of chlorophyll, these simple plants, and in fact all plant life thereafter, had the ability to take some of the dissolved CO2 gas of air from the surrounding water, and with the aid of sunlight energy, convert it to glucose sugar, C6H12O6. Such organisms used the glucose molecules to satisfy their chemical energy needs, to metabolize, to grow, and then to reproduce. Photosynthesis had evolved. As a by-product of photosynthesis, free OXYGEN, O2 gas, was released into the atmosphere. Initially, O2 was toxic to life, but some cells survived and adapted. Bit by bit, and molecule by gaseous molecule, it was in large measure the plant life of Earth which created the atmosphere as we know it! Then, after millions of years of evolution, the green algae and other kinds of algae came on the scene, followed by the simpler land plants like liverworts, mosses, and ferns. The trees and flowering plants evolved much later. But all plants, from the simplest to the most complex, were (and still are) photosynthesizing away, and they still create and maintain the gaseous compounds of the atmosphere as we know it. It must be emphasized that the only reason plants could live, photosynthesize and sustain the healthy atmosphere which has already existed for tens upon tens of thousands of years, and which continues to exist today, is because the CARBON CYCLE has worked, and is still in action all over the world. This cycle replenishes the supply of good, clean, natural, SCARCE and ecologically essential component of air we call CARBON DIOXIDE, or CO2, gas! For thousands of years, already, and certainly today, the chemical composition of the air of our planet, at sea level, has had a stable chemical composition which is 78% nitrogen gas, 21% O2 gas, about 0.8% argon, and the extremely low value of 0.03% to 0.04% CO2 gas content -- which thankfully, low though it is, is still adequate for meeting the needs of the plant life of the planet. Plants need CO2 to live, and human beings need plants to live. No, the CO2 content of air, from any source including from anthropogenic, human-made sources is still extremely low, and absolutely vital for meeting the needs of the plant life of the planet. CO2 content of air is NOT excessive, and out of control. If there is any global warming, or global climate change, at all, this could not possibly be attributable to the still extremely low CO2 content of the atmosphere at sea level!
Fast Forward to the Present Era
The main objective of the Kyoto Protocol / Accord (kyoto), with the full support and funding by the Chretien Liberals, seemed to have been to vilify and scapegoat CO2, even though the air contains so little of it to begin with! For example, in Canada, massive nation-wide publicity campaigns were mounted to scare the citizens of the country into thinking that human-generated CO2 gas concentration in the air we breathe is somehow bad, excessively high, a terrible toxin and pollutant, that its production is ever increasing and out of control, and that it is the cause of global warming / global climate change. None of this is true, but this is how the Kyoto Protocol / Accord was sold to the people of Canada by their Liberal government. As mentioned already, the CO2 content of air is still a scant 0.03% to 0.04% at sea level, just as it has been for thousands of years. Don't forget, the plants of Earth consume CO2 gas, including the man-made, anthropogenic CO2, just as fast at it is released into the air, and they will gladly consume even more CO2 if given more (as a result of a forest fire; or as a result of the "fizz" from a carbonated soft drink or from a beer burp; or as a result of decay from a compost pile, for example.)
It is well-known by honest scientists that if by any chance the plantlife of the planet could not consume all of the CO2 which gets into the atmosphere from decay, or forest fires, or car exhausts, or belchings from people and volcanoes, or from cellular respiration by all plants and animals, or from a multitude of other processes... the excess CO2 gas will simply dissolve into the vast bodies of water of Earth's rivers, lakes and oceans. Over geologic time this excess CO2 has reacted chemically with other ions to create carbonates, for example, to help create coral reefs, and vast limestone deposits all over the planet. CO2 released by all human activities is also dealt with in the same ecologically sound manner by nature. The bottom line is that the CO2 content of air will still stay close to the low, normal concentration of between 0.03% - 0.04%. This LOW amount of CO2 is simply not enough to cause global warming, or global climate change of any kind. The Kyoto Accord / Protocol was absolutely useless and ineffectual. Moreover, any laws, regulations, edicts or carbon trading schemes which vilify CO2, or which attempt to reduce the CO2 content of the atmosphere of the planet will prove to be ineffectual and without merit.
Kyoto Accord / Kyoto Protocol... From Good Intentions to Environmental Hoax ... Lessons from Recent Canadian History
A United Nations environmental issues conference was held in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997. The participants made a pact, the Kyoto Accord or Kyoto Protocol (kyoto). The aim of the agreement was to get governments of the more affluent nations to introduce measures in their respective countries to reduce the amount of the so-called greenhouse gases emitted into air by 5.2% (6% for Canada) of 1990 levels. This reduction was to happen in each country by years 2008 to 2012. The hope was to stop, and even reverse, global warming / global climate change; a laudable goal IF global warming is real (see references, below), and IF human intervention can reduce such warming. Although carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs, among others, were identified as being greenhouse gases, CARBON DIOXIDE gas, CO2, more than any of the other gases, was targeted for curtailment. Whatever for? As already mentioned, CO2 is a good, clean, scarce, natural and ecologically essential component of air. Plants cannot live without CO2. The intentions of the Kyoto attendees might have been good and honourable, but we must ask, "Is there serious, abnormal global warming?" Ans. Probably not. "If global warming is real, is it out of control?" Ans. Probably not. "If global warming is real, is it caused by a buildup of CO2 in air?" A most emphatic NO! There is no buildup. CO2 content of air has been extremely low for thousands of years, and is still extremely LOW; still only 0.03% to 0.04% of the total mixture of all of the different kinds of gases which make up air at sea level. Why did the Kyoto Protocol / Accord committee not go after water vapour, H2O gas? Compared to CO2, H20 vapour is a much more significant greenhouse gas. Could it be that the kyoto committee needed a "cash cow". Of course. It is more convenient to levy a tax on carbon (read petroleum) than on water. But first, CO2 had to be made out to be the culprit. How could this be done? This was done by a series of massive Government of Canada advertising campaigns. Tens of millions of scarce, taxpayers' dollars were spent to vilify CO2 by our own Ministry of Natural Resources, and some other ministries of the Government of Canada in 2002 and 2003, and it's still going on. Anyway, CO2 became the kyoto target by default; not because it is a significant greenhouse gas, but because by targeting petroleum, leftist ideologues finally saw a way to redistribute the wealth from the "have" to the "have not" nations of the world -- a way to finally "sock it too the rich" of the affluent, decadent West.
Anyway, in low concentrations, CO2 does not contribute to global warming / global climate change -- and the CO2 content of air IS low. If CO2 is not at fault, but is, nevertheless, scapegoated as by kyoto and the government of Canada, then we have a hoax; a hoax of national and international proportions.
Canada was a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol. As a plant scientist, and as a teacher of biology and chemistry for close to 30 years, I know the value and importance of atmospheric CO2 for life on Earth. I feel betrayed by my government, and by certain factions within the environmental movement, because they've decided to scapegoat and lambaste CO2 just to get the Kyoto Protocol/Accord ratified and implemented, or so it seems. The Kyoto Protocol is based on flawed science, and is without moral or scientific merit. .....But all is not lost, yet. There is still time for the Government of Canada, et al, to distance themselves from Kyoto. Most importantly, although it is now ratified, the government of Canada does not have to implement the seriously flawed Kyoto Protocol.
One does not have to be a scientist, though, to sense that something is wrong with Kyoto. For example, fill in the blanks in the following sentences: "Plants take in _ _ gas, and release _ gas. Animals inhale _ gas, and exhale _ _ gas". Does this seem familiar? Sure. Most of us learned these simple truisms as children, perhaps even before high school. The green parts of plants DO absorb good, clean CO2 from air and release oxygen gas, O2, back to the air, while the cells of animals (and plants) take in oxygen gas, and release good, clean CO2, back to the air. Students learn early on that the lives of plants and animals are entwined. Likewise, students learn early on that CO2 is essential for the growth and development of plants and for all life on Earth. Remember photosynthesis?
Ratification of Kyoto by the Parliament of Canada
Oddly enough, though, the kyoto gurus, and certain politicians in Ottawa, might not be able to fill in the above blanks correctly. Judging by their actions in Parliament, far too many of them seem to deny that CO2 is good and essential for life on Earth. In fact, many lambaste CO2, referring to it as toxic, or as being a pollutant. Nothing could be further from the truth. Carbon monoxide is toxic. Carbon dioxide, CO2 gas, is anything but toxic. CO2 is a good, ecologically essential component of air. The underlying problem could stem from the fact that politicians, like all people, do not retain everything they learn as youngsters. Judging by the outcome of the Kyoto debate, which raged across our land during most of 2002, forgetfulness of things once learned -- or was it selective amnesia -- struck certain Canadian federal politicians, including the Prime Minister of the day, Jean Chretien, and his Minister of the Environment, David Anderson, and most Liberal Members of Parliament, and the NDP MPs, particularly hard. It seems that they never did learn, or conveniently forgot, what they had once been taught about the carbon cycle, ecology, photosynthesis, cellular respiration, and how important CO2 is for the well-being of life on Earth. If they had remembered, they could not, in good conscience, have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Consequently, and sadly for Canada, Kyoto was adopted by Parliament on Tuesday, December 10, 2002, when a majority of the MPs, our Members of Parliament, voted for it, clearing the way for the Prime Minister to sign the seriously flawed Kyoto Accord document to complete the ratification process on Monday, December 16, 2002. Shame on former Prime Minister Chretien, and shame on his Minister of the Environment, David Anderson, and on all others who promoted Kyoto. Let us hope that Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, and his current Minister of the Environment, John Baird, will consult unbiased, reputable, intelligent scientists and NOT implement any part of the Kyoto Protocol.
Scandals, Corruption and Kyoto
As bad as the "science" of Kyoto has been, and it is very badly flawed, indeed, ratification of the Kyoto Protocol set in motion what could become the most massive, devious, and systematic "shafting" of the already beleaguered taxpayers of Canada, IF kyoto is implemented. Actually, this should not surprise anyone. The Liberal Party of Canada, which ran the show in Ottawa until very recently was seriously prone to scandals from the getgo, as documented by the media.......
....... A billion dollars missing from HRDC, another billion, or more, wasted on the gun registry, $7.7 billion lost through various so-called "charitable foundations", "Shawinigate", cronyism, Quebec advertising sponsorship scandals, lax immigration rules, hundreds of millions wasted on a faulty computer program to keep track of people moving into and out of Canada across our porous borders, $1 billion siphoned off through GST refund scandals, overcharging of hard working Canadians for EI (employment insurance), the former P.M.'s many patronage appointments, and the list goes on and on. Wonderful, eh? As if the country has no more urgent needs! .... and on and on it goes. Apparently, it was OK, and business as usual, that theft of public monies took place on a regular basis by elected and appointed government officials, yet rarely, if ever, was anyone called to account. Why not? Why aren't the responsible individuals indicted, and behind bars by now? We can only hope that justice, high ethical standards and common sense based on science will return to Ottawa now that Stephen Harper of the CPC is the new Prime Minister of Canada.
What's Wrong with Kyoto?
What's wrong with the Kyoto Protocol? To the uninitiated, nothing. It seems to be the solution to dirty air and global warming. But to many plant scientists, climate scientists, chemists, and others, the science of kyoto is all wrong. The Kyoto Protocol is particularly problematic because it is based on falsehoods, some of which are as follows: (1) that CO2 is a pollutant -- a toxic emission. It is not. Carbon monoxide, CO, is toxic, but CO is a completely different substance, and not a "greenhouse gas". (2) that anthropogenic (human generated) CO2 content of air is too high and out of control. It is not. It is actually a scarce component of air at sea level -- only 0.03% to 0.04%. (3) that the concentration of CO2 in air, LOW though this may be, still manages to cause global climate change / global warming. Impossible. Not so at all. (4) that by their regulations, laws and edicts, governments can affect, that is somehow reduce, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere of planet Earth, at sea level. Impossible! Lies, all lies as you will see in a moment.
Why the former recent Governments of Canada Scapegoated CO2
In reality, CO2 IS A GOOD, ECOLOGICALLY ESSENTIAL GAS. Why doesn't Kyoto target water vapour, or sun spots, or even freshly plowed, dark coloured fields, urban centres with dark roofs, and asphalt roads both of which absorb light energy and radiate heat back to the atmosphere. These are all considerably more likely contributors to global warming, IF it even exists, than is CO2? As mentioned, above, water molecules in air constitute a much more significant greenhouse gas than does CO2. No. Certain environmentalists, and the Chretien Liberals, had a need to target carbon, in this case carbon in the form of CO2. Why? -- So that monies could be extracted from the petroleum and automobile industries, and from the citizens of Canada who need energy and cars. In a moment, another, possibly more sinister and more damning ulterior motive for implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, one involving the redistribution of the the wealth of Canadians to third world potentates, and implicating the highest public officials of the land during the Chretien era of government, will become apparent, but I must warn you, this is speculative, and hopefully not true. For the sake of all Canadians, it is to be hoped that the Stephen Harper Conservatives have more sense and are more principled, and will not implement Kyoto. But now, getting back to carbon dioxide, CO2.
Life on Earth is Carbon-Based... All of that Carbon Originates with Good, Clean, Ecologically Essential CO2 of Air
CO2 cannot possibly be bad because every ecosystem on Earth relies on green plants, and plants need CO2, like our public school teachers taught. Plants produce food and oxygen for all living things. Plants are the "primary producers", the "autotrophs", of every food chain, web and food pyramid. But in order to live and fulfill their ecological role, plants must have light, mineralized water, and they must have access to CO2 gas of air (or dissolved bicarbonate ions for phytoplankton, algae and other aquatic plants). Yes, during photosynthesis, all green plants "eat" light and INORGANIC, atmospheric CO2 gas with their leaves, and their other green parts. This is how they make ORGANIC glucose sugar which they then use to satisfy their own energy needs, and from which they make molecules of more complex substances such as carbohydrates, fats, proteins,nucleic acids (DNA), etc. Take any plant. On a dry weight basis, most of the mass of that plant is due to its carbon atoms; the very same carbon atoms which were assimilated from CO2 gas of air. When plants and plant products such as firewood, cardboard, or coal (ancient plants) are burned, combustion releases the CO2 gas that that plant, or plants, borrowed from air for the duration of its / their lifetime(s). Once plants have consumed CO2 to create their living biomass, then heterotrophs, (the saprophytes, carnivores, and omnivores -- like us) also get to eat. We all eat plants directly or indirectly. LIFE ON EARTH IS CARBON BASED. The carbon atoms we get from food become a major part of our essential organic molecules. We must never forget that most of the carbon atoms, which every person has assimilated into his / her being, from the food they ate, were part of the good, clean CO2 gas of air just a little while before.
Hopefully, Ms Ambrose, the new Minister of the Environment, will not lambaste CO2, as was the habit of Ministers Anderson and Dion. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. The concentration of atmospheric CO2 is NOT out of control. It is exactly where it should be. The CO2 concentration of the air is already at a correct, LOW level, in a state of dynamic equilibrium with its biotic and abiotic environmental components. This CO2 concentration is dictated by the physical and chemical laws of nature; not by man and his laws, protocols and accords.
The Concentration of CO2 at Sea Level is Extremely LOW!
Globally, it is the consumption of CO2 by plants, AND the worldwide dynamic chemical equilibrium reactions, that keep the atmospheric content of CO2 low. Here on Earth, close to sea level, the normal concentration of CO2 in air has held steady for hundreds if not for thousands of years at between 0.03% and 0.04%. This low percentage is only 3 to 4 litres of CO2 in 10,000 litres of air, or 300 to 400 ppm (parts per million). [Contrast this with the normal amounts of nitrogen gas at 78% or 7800 L per 10,000 L of air, or 780,000 ppm of N2; and oxygen gas at 21% or 2100 L per 10,000 L of air, or 210,000 ppm of O2.] Of course, there are seasonal variations, and local variations (e.g. greater CO2 concentrations in marshy spots and low lying areas in the summer), but that is neither abnormal nor bad for life on Earth.
Carbon "Sinks"
The amount of carbon atoms on Earth is finite. The large repositories of carbon on Earth are called carbon "sinks". A carbon content balance, or chemical equilibrium, exists among the different kinds of carbon compounds and ions in the different "sinks":
Sink #1. is the atmosphere with its low CO2 gas content
Sink #2. includes all bodies of water like the oceans, lakes, rivers, and ponds containing vast, stores of dissolved CO2, the bicarbonate, HCO3- ions
Sink #3. includes organic carbon compounds found in living things, and in all dead organic matter, too. This category includes all of those atoms of carbon that were first absorbed from air as CO2 gas, and then assimilated, by green plants. The dead organic matter includes thousands of years' worth of dead peat moss deposits, coal seams, natural gas and petroleum wells, not to mention all corpses, fallen autumn leaves, and decaying logs, etc. Decay and oxidation (combustion reactions) will liberate the carbon that is stored in organic substances back to air as inorganic carbon dioxide, CO2, gas -- and that is normal and good... even if that release of CO2 gas into air occurs from internal combustion and diesel engines. Chemically speaking, CO2 is CO2, and it is all appreciated by, and essential to plants.
Sink #4. includes "petrified" CO2 gas of air, that is limestone in its many forms. The main ingredient of all forms of limestones is calcium carbonate, CaCO3(s). In nature, CaCO3 forms when CO2 gas reacts with a saturated solution of calcium hyrdoxide ( Recall the science class experiment where you bubbled your breath, containing lots of CO2, through "limewater", and it became cloudy due to formation of CaCO3. Perhaps this is where you first encountered the term, "precipitate". That milky white precipitate is calcium carbonate, CaCO3). Also, in nature CaCO3 forms when bicarbonate ions, HCO3-(aq), combine with calcium ions, Ca2+(aq), in ocean water, or in any other body of water. Being a solid, the resulting CaCO3 precipitates, and settles out. After millions upon millions of years of such settling, the ooze of CaCO3 hardens to make limestone layers on the sea floor. CaCO3 is also made by many kinds of living things, including various molluscans and coeleterates / cnidarians such as coral animals to build their shells or skeletons.
CaCO3 is usually the principal chemical ingredient in things such as: egg shells, skeletons of certain animals, TUMS antacid tablets, marble, dolomite, the coral reefs created by coral animals, shells of certain mollusks, sedimentary limestone bedrock everywhere including south of the Canadian Shield in much of southern and eastern Ontario, and wherever there are limestone caves all over the world, and CaCO3 does make up at least parts of certain mountains of Planet Earth such as the Oscar Range in Australia, the Stone Forest in China, and the impressive Himalayan Range. In all of these examples, the carbon atoms that are trapped in the molecules of mineralized CaCO3, all started out as carbon in CO2 of air. Such carbon may stay trapped as CaCO3 in the solid form for perhaps millions of years, for geologic time, before being released into air again as CO2..... for use by plants. Make no mistake, though. Such "rock" is reserve CO2 gas. In time it will return to the atmosphere to serve as "food" for phytoplankton and higher plants, or will precipitate again, perhaps millions of years hence.
Dynamic Chemical Equilibrium, and the Carbon "Sinks"
When it comes to carbon sinks, it might help to think of each sink as a "bulge", like the ears and nose bulging out of an immense, world encompassing, Mickey Mouse balloon. One bulge represents the CO2 gas of air "sink". Another bulge is the organic carbon "sink". Another the limestone "sink", and another bulge is for the HCO3-(aq) ions "sink". Squeeze one bulge and "carbon" moves into one, or more, of the other bulges. In the real world, the "squeezing" might be achieved by perfectly normal and natural ways, or by artificial, human imposed ways as proposed by kyoto. An important, normal and natural way occurs every moment of every day, worldwide, when plants remove CO2 from air for use during photosynthesis as they convert the inorganic carbon of CO2 gas to organic carbon compounds for themselves. Of course, the carbon that is removed from air when plants use up the CO2 supply in air, has to be replaced, and it is. Some of the carbon in the other "sinks" is converted to CO2 gas, which then diffuses into the air. This happens because of a principle of chemistry (LeChatelier) which says in effect that, in a system at equilibrium, THAT chemical reaction will take place, inevitably, which will alleviate a "stress" imposed on the system from the outside. In our situation with carbon, the imposed "stresses" could be due to increases or decreases in the concentrations of gaseous and ionic forms of carbon (not solid). So, when plants remove CO2 from air, that's a "stress" imposed on the chemical equilibrium system of the planet. If not enough CO2 is returned to the atmosphere by cellular respiration or forest fires, or decay of organic matter, etc., then the oceans of the world will automatically convert some of the dissolved bicarbonate, HCO3-(aq) ions, back to gaseous CO2 of air. (By the same token, if the atmosphere gets too much CO2, from whatever source -- man-made or natural, the excess will dissolve in the oceans to make more HCO3- ions .) Exactly the same would happen no matter how much belt-tightening Canadians will be forced to undergo to cut down on so-called "greenhouse gases" -- i.e. CO2 gas. If Kyoto measures are imposed, and CO2 is removed from the atmosphere, the planet itself would simply reach into its vast reserves (the "sinks") and pump out more CO2 gas into the atmosphere to replace the CO2 gas that the fondest of kyoto edicts, imposed by the (previous two Liberal) Governments of Canada, would have removed from the system. Kyoto Accord implementation would be the silliest, most futile thing, biologically and chemically speaking! Again, hopefully, Minister Ambrose will understand, and refuse to implement Kyoto
Anthropogenic CO2
Where does human activity fit into this equilibrium? Of course, anthropogenic CO2 happens, but in the greater scheme of things, it is insignificant. Imagine, compared to natural processes, CO2 generated by all human activities combined, including from the exhaled breaths of the 6 billion people on planet Earth, and all of their livestock, plus ALL CO2 released into air by industrial and vehicular activities of human beings, all of that hardly amounts to anything on a percentage basis, worldwide. And please do not forget that whatever CO2 gas does get into the air, and from whatever source, that CO2 does not accumulate in the atmosphere. It is constantly and rapidly recycled by the plant life in all bodies of water of Earth, and on terra firma. Plants "Eat" CO2!
The Futility of Meddling
Human meddling -- forcing industries and citizens by laws, edicts and regulations to curtail CO2 release into the atmosphere --, such as might be attempted in Canada upon implementation of Kyoto, will not make any difference, one way or another, to the concentration of CO2 gas in air. If too much CO2 builds up in air, it will be consumed by plants, or will be dissolved into waters of the seas. If CO2 levels drop, as by Kyoto efforts, the other "sinks" ("bulges") will liberate more CO2 to the air. There is not a damn thing people and governments can do to affect these natural processes. Quite frankly, it would be an easier task for human beings to prevent earthquakes, tornados and hurricanes, or to part the Red Sea once again, than to affect changes in the atmospheric CO2 concentrations, appreciably. No, Canadians will get NOTHING but much aggravation and costs with the implementation of kyoto; not further reduction of CO2, which concentrations are already low as it is -- in fact perpetually low, because of the equilibrium which exists among the carbon in the various "sinks".
Global Cooling, A "What IF" Problem
Given the opportunity, I would like to ask all those who still support Kyoto, "If the climate of Earth should ever be faced with global COOLING, instead of the current, incorrectly perceived situation of global warming, would they institute laws/regulations/edicts which would force the citizens of Canada, and Canadian industries, to manufacture extra CO2, perhaps by providing grant monies for citizens to purchase SUVs and other gas guzzlers, and would they insist that citizens with fireplaces in their homes burn coal to release as much CO2 gas into air as possible so as to warm up the atmosphere over Canada, and of course, over that of Planet Earth?" "Don't be silly", you might say. For the sake of consistency, though, they should! But they would probably not do so... and I hope that they would not do so. That would be a ludicrous, stupid and futile thing to do. Yet that would be no more ludicrous, stupid and futile than what the Chretien / Anderson and Martin / Dion teams were hell bent on doing via implementation of the Kyoto Accord; ~ to curtail CO2 emissions in order to stop and then reverse global warming. If the Harper / Baird team should also insist on the implementation of Kyoto, then lots of money will be spent by the government, ...but all for naught. This would turn out to be a much more costly and scandalous wasteage of taxpayers' monies than the Quebec advertizing scandals (AdScams) ever were. Human meddling, i.e, meddling by governments, could not, and would not, affect global air temperatures in the least!
CO2 is a Good, Clean Gas. Smoke is Pollution. CO2 is not Smoke
From all the government sponsored hype, it may be difficult for you to believe that in reality CO2 is a pure, clear, colourless, and odourless gas, but it really is thus. CO2 is most definitely NOT a foul smelling, blue-black smoke escaping from the tail pipes of gasoline guzzlers or from the smoke stacks of coal-fired electricity generating facilities. Those kinds of "clouds" are indeed smoke. Smoke contains particulate matter, which is pollution and should be cleaned up. Don't confuse smoke with good, clean, CO2 gas which you cannot see or smell.
Nature, and Human Beings, Make Lots of CO2, and That's OK. Don't Feel Guilty
It is fortunate for life on Earth that although CO2 is removed from the air by plant life at a rapid rate, it is restored just as quickly, and by diverse pathways, most of which are quite "green" and proper, as a matter of fact. Here are a few examples to remind us of how "Mother Nature" uses her "Carbon Cycle", of which human beings are also a part, to replenish the CO2 gas content of air. CO2 is replenished by .....
.....The living, breathing lungs of the 6 billion people on Earth, and all respiring animals and most other forms of life on Earth. The good, clean CO2 thus released into the air is recycled quickly by living plants. It cannot, and does not build up in air to cause global warming.
.....Decay of every kind, including the rotting of logs in old growth forests, produces good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by living plants.
.....Cremation of corpses produces good, clean CO2 gas -- for recycling by future generations of living plants.
.....Breweries, bakeries, and fermentation vats at biotechnological and pharmaceutical companies release lots of good, clean CO2 for recycling by living plants.
.....The fizz of escaping gas from newly opened bottles of champagne, beer and cans of pop is due to good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by living plants. (You wouldn't want kyoto to outlaw such refreshments, would you?)
.....Bonfires, flickering candles on dinner tables and in cathedrals, forest fires, dung fires in parts of Asia and Africa, and wood burning in fireplaces in homes of the humble and the hauty, alike, all release good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by living plants.
.....Furnaces which burn heating-oil, or natural gas (methane), to warm homes during our long winter months, all release good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by green plants in southern climes, and during the following growing season in Canada. (Yes, when methane burns, it too, most assuredly, releases CO2.)
.....Using gasoline, or ethanol (grain alcohol to make "gasahol") in internal combustion engines of cars, lawn mowers, trucks, motorcycles, snowmobiles, tractors, motorboats, or using diesel fuel in the diesel engines of cars, trucks, trains, and even modern cargo and cruise ships. These all produce good, clean CO2 --for recycling by green plants.
.....Combustion of aviation fuel - kerosene power - which drives hot gases through turbine engines of jet planes, produces lots and lots of good, clean CO2, but this CO2 just might stay up high where the contrails form, because plants can not reach that CO2 so high up. This, out of reach CO2, is the only CO2 gas which might contribute to the greenhouse effect, slightly. But will kyoto outlaw jet planes? Not on your life. Politicians and certain environmental activists, and the rest of us as well, like to fly too much.
.....Swallowing calcium carbonate containing antacid tablets (like TUMS), or certain kinds of calcium supplements, might make you burp. Guess what? The gas released by such burps is also good, clean CO2 -- which plants will recycle before long.
.....When autumn leaves decay on forest floors across Canada, and when compost piles perk away to create rich humus for our gardens, immense quantities of good, clean CO2 are released -- for recycling by green plants.
.....Using coal fires, or natural gas to boil water to create pressurized steam to spin electricity generators, also releases lots of good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by green plants. That CO2 is NOT pollution. If such facilities produce smoke, then the soot must be filtered and "scrubbed" out. Kyoto is NOT needed to achieve this.
.....Finally, it must be stated that certain categories of volcanos spew out more CO2 gas in a few hours than is produced in a year by all worldwide human activities combined. These volcanic eruptions go on every day, year in and year out, and have been going on for most of the 5 billion years that Earth has existed. But plants don't mind. This volcanic CO2 is also good, clean CO2 -- for recycling by plants everywhere. (The Kyoto Accord doesn't propose to plug up such volcanos, does it?)
Why Does Air Not Run Out of O2?
If you still have a hard time accepting that the CO2 gas concentration of the atmosphere is not high and out of control, and that, instead, the CO2 content is LOW, thanks to the plant-life of Earth, let me challenge you to think about the OXYGEN gas, O2, content of the air at sea level. If you still believe that the CO2 content of air is building up, then surely, the O2 content of air must be running low by now? After all, the six billion human beings on Earth, plus all other animals, plus most other living things, including plants, too, consume O2 gas every moment of every day around the clock, and have been doing so for millions upon millions of years (and for more than 4 billion years for some of the most ancient species). Moreover, countless non-biological oxidation reactions like rusting, and corrosion of metals, and many combustion reations, also consume atmospheric O2. Sure, the O2 supply should be running out, should it not? Oddly enough, and thankfully, though, O2 is NOT running out! Just as the CO2 content of air is holding steady at 0.03 to 0.04%, so the O2 content of air at sea level is likewise steady, still, at close to where it has been for long eons of time; at close to 21%. Amazing, yes, but no more amazing than why CO2 content remains LOW. Explanations: the PLANT-LIFE of planet Earth regenerates and replenishes the O2 content of air, and maintains it at close to 21% by the sea at the same time that these same plants "EAT" CO2. Plants regenerate O2 gas of air by the so-called "photolysis reactions" (photophosphorylation: "light reactions") of photosynthesis as they "break up" water, H2O, molecules to get energized hydrogen ions, and oxygen. The O2 gas, a by-product of photosynthesis, just happens to be one of the essential materials needed by almost all living things to obtain energy from glucose molecules during cellular respiration. The energized hydrogen ions, on the other hand, remain in the leaves, and green cells, and are used by all green plants during the so-called "Calvin Cycle" (the "dark reactions" or "synthesis reactions") of photosynthesis... to convert CO2 gas from air into living biomass. It is the "dark reactions" of photosynthesis which keep the CO2 content of air LOW. Yes, it is photosynthesis that maintains the atmospheric O2 gas concentration at 21%, AND the atmospheric CO2 gas concentration at the low 0.03 to 0.04%, at sea level, year in and year out. Yes, 0.03% to 0.04% is such a low and steady atmospheric concentration of CO2 that THE KYOTO PROTOCOL IS NOT NEEDED!!!
CO2 as "Fertilizer"
CO2 is CO2, no matter the source, and plants love it all. Horticulturists have been known to "spike" the air in their greenhouses with extra CO2 to promote more rapid, and lush plant growth just as they control the temperature of the air in the greenhouse, soil moisture, soil mixtures, soil nutrients (fertilizer), soil pH (acidity/alkalinity), light quality (proper wavelengths) and light quantity (hours of exposure and intensity of light). No, CO2 is not a pollutant. In a sense, carbon dioxide is a plant fertilizer absorbed through the leaves and other green parts.
Of "Emissions Reduction Credits", Potentates, Redistribution of Wealth, and Corruption
Now, more about the sinister ulterior motive, mentioned earlier: We, the ordinary citizens of Canada, have not been told the whole truth about kyoto. I may be wrong, but it sure seems that the previous Prime Minister, who referred to himself as "the little guy from Shawinigan" wanted very much to go down in INTERNATIONAL history books as THE leader of an affluent Western nation who initiated systematic redistribution of wealth from the 1st world to the 3rd world; from the affluent, developed world to the poor, "developing" world. How? --by the pretense of buying so-called "emissions reduction credits" (or "green credits, or "carbon offset credits") from certain "poorer" countries like some in Africa, and of course Russia (....even though Canada already has lots of greenery which WE could "sell"). From where, exactly, would the billions upon billions of dollars come? From where else, but us, the taxpayers, consumers and corporations of Canada: from fees levied on the petroleum industry -- which of course would have been passed on to us, the consumers; from fees and taxes levied on the automobile industry -- which again would be foisted on the consuming, car-buying public; and from direct taxes and fees levied on the citizens of Canada, and the industries of Canada. Although such "emissions trading" fees have been euphamistically termed "green fees" or "carbon taxes" or "carbon offsets" , they are anything but benign. Such fees are very, very corrosive, deceitful, and devious. Why? because by now you must know that CARBON AS CARBON DIOXIDE, OR CARBON IN ANY OTHER FORM, IS NOT AT FAULT AT ALL. During the summer of 2004, one major energy corporation headquartered in western Canada, proudly announced to their shareholders that they had made a deal with a Chilean pork producer to purchase "emissions reduction credits" IF forced to do so by the Parliament of Canada. This would be criminal corporate behaviour. This corporation is literally ready to throw away shareowners' monies if pressured by the Federal Government of Canada to meet such a government's foolish, Kyoto objectives, although indications are that the CPC Party will be more responsible.
One more time. Since there is no need to lambaste CO2, there is no need for the Kyoto Accord. Since there is no need for the Kyoto Accord in any way shape or form, there is no sensible reason for the Government to force Canadian citizens and corporations to pay "emissions reduction credits". Most of us do NOT want to give any more: not for income taxes, not for property taxes, not for GST, not for airport taxes, not for higher gasoline taxes, and most definitely not for greasing the palms of corrupt politicians anywhere in the world. We do not want our governments and our corporations to purchase the obscene and unneeded "carbon credits" / "emissions reduction credits". Prime Minister Harper and Environment Minister Baird, if you can, why don't you sell the world some of Canada's "emissions reduction credits"? We have lots and lots of forests, millions of hectars under crops plants, hay fields, manicured lawns, golf courses, orchards, and billions of hectars of living moss plants in the tundra regions of Canada. -- All of these plants "EAT" CO2 during our long sunlit summers. These plants are fantastic carbon-absorbing "sponges". Sell these as "emissions reduction credits". Yes, yes, I know. We are a "have" nation, and as such, the resistance from the Kyoto "governors" would be high. But try! If the Government of Canada could lease the plantlife in our wilderness regions to other nations looking for "emissions reduction credits", it wouldn't happen. No other country on Earth is as gullible as Canada. No other nation on Earth is gullible enough to fall for such a Ponzi scheme.
Hope for Canadians, IF...
It is hoped that Canadian parliamentarians will continue to support conservation programs, to fight real degradation and pollution of our environment, and to set aside more lands for national and provincial parks. Above all, though, it is hoped that parliamentarians and citizens of every political stripe will begin to insist upon high ethical standards. Sweep clean the halls of Parliament. End corruption and scandals. See to it that past, and present, wrong-doers of all political stripes, and from any political party, are brought to justice. ~ And, federal politicians, especially, for goodness sake, DO NOT IMPLEMENT the extremely flawed Kyoto Accord / Protocol. Once the citizens of Canada figure out that the Kyoto Accord is without scientific or moral merit -- and they WILL eventually -- the Quebec advertizing sponsorship scandals, slush funds, and all other scandalous schemes, behaviours and activities, will pale in comparison to the extremely silly and expensive hoax which the Kyoto Accord would turn out to be.
*************************************************************************
* The author is a retired teacher of biology, chemistry, physics and general science. He is a former research agronomist (soil chemistry, fertility and microbiology), and has worked as a chemist in the sugar industry in the USA and in Canada.
This blog was first published in January, 2003.
Some references / related readings:
1. Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, O.I.S.M.: http://www.oism.org/oism/#Top
2. (a) Crichton, Michael. State of Fear. Harper Collins Publishers. 2004
(b) Addresses and essays by noted author and film maker, Michael Crichton, M.D.
(Harvard), and others, dealing with several relevant topics about the Kyoto
Accord / Protocol ................
http://www.sitewave.net/news/
(c) Crichton, Michael. Verify climate science -- "Testimony of Michael Crichton, author of 'State of Fear', before the U.S. Senate committee on environment and public works on Sept. 28 [2005]", Financial Post of the National Post newspaper, Tuesday, October 4, 2005, FP page 21.
3. The Science & Environmental Policy Project ..... http://sepp.org/
4. Readers Digest .....http://www.readersdigest.ca/debate.html?a=v&di=154
Then refer to contributions by the following:
Paavo Siitam (June 2, 2002), Allan MacRae (June 11th), Prof. Tim Patterson (June 12th), Bob Pawley (September 4th), and many others, in response to a Readers Digest (Canadian Edition) article by Bjorn Lomborg, author, professor, and environmentalist.
5. Read: Climate Change is Natural, the "Comment" feature article in the Globe and Mail newspaper of Tuesday, November 19, 2002, written by Dr. Sallie Baliunas, Deputy Director at Mount Wilson Observatory and Astrophysicist at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics; Dr. Tim Patterson, Professor of Geology (Paleoclimatology) Department of Earth Sciences, Carlton University, Ottawa; and Allan MacRae, Professional Engineer, Investment Banker, and Environmentalist.
6. Patterson, Tim. Kyoto Debunked, Financial Post of the National Post newspaper, Wednesday, October 29, 2003, Page FP17. Dr. Tim Patterson is a professor in the Department of Earth Sciences at Carlton University, Canada.
7. http://www.friendsofscience.org/
8. Victor, David G. of Stanford University, The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow Global Warming, Princeton University Press, April, 2003
9. http://www.EnviroTruth.org/
10. Corcoran, Terence. The Broken Stick. The Financial Post. Tuesday, July 13, 2004. FP pg11. AND Hockey sticks and hatchets. The Financial Post, National Post, Wednesday, Auguast 23, 2006, FP18 and FP19. Besides this article exposing the faulty, if not downright fraudulent, data used by the Government of Canada of two previous Liberal Party of Canada administrations to "sell" the Kyoto Protocol /Accord to the Canadian public, Terence Corcoran, and other fine writers and scientists, have authored numerous other articles to reveal the weaknesses of Kyoto in the pages of The Financial Post / National Post.
11. Legates, David. Where's the Data -- holding science to prospectus standards would stop climate researchers from launching misrepresentations like the Hockey Stick. The Financial Post. Tuesday, September 20, 2005. David Legates is an associate professor and director of the Center for Climatic Research at the University of Delaware in Newarl, Del.
12. Corcoran, Terence. Time for Finance to seize the climate file. The Financial Post / National Post. Thursday, November 3, 2005. FP pg 23.
13. Labohm, Hans H. J. Requiem for Kyoto -- "The vast majority of countries are unwilling to join the Kyoto approach of binding carbon targets with tradable emissions". The Financial Post / National Post. Thursday, November 3, 2005. FP page 23.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
|
|
| |
|
|
|
