Climate scientists and certain quarters of the media have good political reasons to keep debates alive on climate change. There is strong scientific evidence that the use of fossil fuels contributes towards rising CO² emissions. This on the whole is not necessarily a bad thing, if additional CO² gets soaked-up. However if extra CO² remains in the atmosphere, its presence acts like a reflective thermal blanket, trapping in additional heat that would normally seep into space; mostly as infrared radiation.
On July 12, 2008, the Guardian reported the latest action motivated by profit within the province of Alberta in Canada. The article entitled “Canadians ponder cost of rush for dirty oil“, focuses on the shocking news of destroying ancient wood-land forests, in order to extract tar from its soil for the production of oil at a great ecological cost to the environment. A consequence of felling ancient forests is that oxygen production is reduced.
Extracting tar-oil from soil exemplifies political hypocrisy. Where there is money to be made, it is OK to devastate land and extract resources, ignoring the cost to the local environment including its wildlife. Global corporations involved will make investors even more rich. Governments and political institutions sanction such behaviour because the political elite in power who “govern” will benefit from taxation; some politicians will also have agendas to reap indirect rewards.
This political hypocrisy is not unique to the Canadian government. UK governments have used the discovery and exploitation of North Sea Oil and gas as political capital from the mid 1970s through to the late 1990s, until oil prices collapsed. Government’s of the day successfully used North Sea Oil’s profit to fund their leverage of political expediency, at the cost of contributing towards green-house-gas emissions.
Maverick researchers using science and its application technology, have proposed new methods and constructed new greener engines. Such stories do not adorn the mass media, they are left to social networking sites, in particular bloggers to report.
Politicians use the “global warming crisis” to target the softer option of a normal worker, further taxing under the “green” banner ideology while leaving corporations, rich and super-rich unscathed from such tax changes. Such notions are driven by think tanks and other policy makers that have a government’s ear, demonstrating that many governments around the world today appear to be following a trend of an elitist unregenerate state. These actions only reinforce a perspective that we live in a modern feudalistic society.
CO² emissions contribute towards “global warming”; to what extent is still very much in debate amongst climate scientists and other interested parties. Before all the machinery of the industrial revolution, air quality was better and the ozone layer was much more intact. Since the late 17th century, that began to change dramatically. Other natural phenomena can also add to CO² emissions, such as lakes of methane gas, through to volcanic activity.
Just the sheer number of humans on the planet produce extra heat and CO², from an approximate population of 1.9 billion around 1929, through to a population approximately 6.2 billion by 2009, and yet many of the other vertebrates that inhabit this planet have seen their numbers more than half over this same 80 year period, with many becoming extinct. The real crime here is that political institutions from think tanks through to governments across the world are using scientific research as a leaver to tax its citizens further.
Humankind has made a self-imposed disconnection with the planet that gave birth to them, while the Earth still continues to nurture and protect. From the Neolithic period, human’s ancestors understood this connection with all living and non-living things. So how can we readdress this and still keep useful innovation active?
Research into alternative energy production is one positive direction to take. There are many alternative solutions available for further research; below are a few examples:
- Possible over-unity water heaters; regardless, it’s an alternative method to heat water (and better in my humble opinion), rather than using gas, coal or any other equivalent CO² producing fossil fuel
- ZPE engine to produce electricity – then you don’t need energy suppliers or the mass oil extraction; use the engine to power electric cars
- Electrolysis to extract hydrogen from water
- Radio waves to produce room-temperature hydrogen-oxygen bond separation (fission of sorts)
- Microwave cavity engine – New Scientist
Instead of chopping down forests for tar-oil, or growing bio-fuel capable plants when there is a world food shortage, re-plant seeds, saplings, cuttings… create life, rather than choosing to destroy. Growing more trees and other plants will help capture CO². Some of the wood can be used for consumption while the rest will provide more oxygen to the planet, help restore climate conditions and provide habitat for our fellow creatures.
Trees should be planted globally, in their billions, with up to 85% of species natural to their local habitat, and faster growing trees that can be used for house building, furniture making, fuel burning. When trees are felled for house building or as a fuel source, they should be replaced proportionally.
When you die, you cannot take your land or wealth with you. Humans don’t really “own”, they are just temporary custodians, for less than the blink of an eye in geological time.