Spiegel, having seen the light recently, has become a fountain of good information.
Another example, this morning:
The poor old Scandinavian moose is now being blamed for climate change, with researchers in Norway claiming that a grown moose can produce 2,100 kilos of methane a year — equivalent to the CO2 output resulting from a 13,000 kilometer car journey.
Norway is concerned that its national animal, the moose, is harming the climate by emitting an estimated 2,100 kilos of carbon dioxide a year through its belching and farting.
Norwegian newspapers, citing research from Norway’s technical university, said a motorist would have to drive 13,000 kilometers in a car to emit as much CO2 as a moose does in a year.
While I don’t question the numbers presented from this research, I can’t help but wonder what the Norwegian action plan is going to be. I mean, if we’re to take global warming seriously, shouldn’t we be charging the moose by the pound for CO2 emissions?
Well, I guess that depends on how much we figure CO2 is an issue. Apparently, Despite the claims of global warming being a done deal, there is still some back and forth as to just how overblown (no pun intended) this stuff is. Hume, last night:
Many media outlets — such as the recent Newsweek magazine cover story — portray man-made global warming as fact and those who deny it as conspirators. But skeptics are increasingly certain that the scare is vastly overblown.
A new study by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz contends that the Earth’s climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the United Nations’ recent climate study claims. Schwarz’s work will be published in The Journal of Geophysical Research.
The study is just one of several peer-reviewed scientific studies challenging global warming alarmism:
The Belgian Weather Institute concludes that carbon dioxide does not have a decisive role in global warming.
A study by two Chinese scientists says CO2’s role in warming is “vastly exaggerated.”
Really? Now they tell us, after we spent all this money trying to limit CO2 emissions, and we’ve fretted about moose and cow farts…. now… (Sigh).
OK, if it isn’t CO2, what IS the problem?
And new research by University of Washington mathematicians shows a correlation between high solar activity and periods of warming.
Nah… a huge radioactive fireball which has been lighting and heating our entire solar system for billions of years… installed in the middle of the solar system… is responsible for the less than one degree of increased warmth here on earth? (Ignore the data coming in from other worlds which suggests they’re getting warmer too… after all, there no SUV there to blame… except Mars… there’s TWO of the things there. We can blame THEM, can’t we? )
Meanwhile, we need to stop burning fossil fuels, and keep burning corn oil and such, right?
Meanwhile, what is billed as the first comprehensive analysis of global biofuel impact has concluded that their use may release between two and nine times more carbon gases than fossil fuels.
The study published in the journal Science says the clearing of forest land to grow biofuel crops will produce immediate carbon gas releases and also destroy habitats, wildlife and jobs. It says that while biofuels look good from a Western perspective, they will be harmful on a global scale. The study contends it will take about 40 percent of American and European agricultural land to grow enough biofuel crops to replace only 10 percent of fossil fuel use.
You know , maybe the best policy here is to get the “global warming” fanatics to shut up long enough to let the truth of the matter filter through. Of course, if they did that, they wouldn’t have the leverage with which to be able to dictate our lifestyle…
Hmmm.
Update: (Bit)
Glenn notes, in the Monty Python vein…. MOOSE FARTS CAN BE PRETTY NASTY, YOU KNOW
He links Bob Krumm, who in his turn notes that
A car is no more destructive to the environment than a couple of farting moose.
Well… OK…
Tags: BitsBlog, Enviro-Nazis
