Green Energy: Anti-Economics, Anti-Science, and Inhumane
By Michael Dorstewitz
Progressives like to admonish others to “follow the science,” except when the science doesn’t support their argument — as in climate change.
And the “green energy” approach to combatting climate change actually ignores science and economics, and will only contribute to human suffering.
One week after Joe Biden’s inauguration, he launched a $2 trillion environmental program with a promise to put “climate change at the center of [his] domestic, national security and foreign policy.”
He plans to eliminate coal, oil, and natural gas as electricity sources by 2035, and move from gasoline and diesel powered motor vehicles to electric, all with an eye toward attaining net zero carbon emissions by 2050.
But that goal isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. In fact, you could even call it Neanderthal-style thinking.
Other than the fact that all life on Earth—both animal and vegetable—is carbon-based, it turns out that plant life needs carbon for its very existence, according to environmental pioneer, Dr. Patrick Moore.
Moore co-founded Greenpeace, is one of its former directors, and currently serves on the board of the CO2 Coalition. He also authored the recently released book, “Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom.”
Newsmax asked Moore whether Biden’s goal of net zero carbon emissions within 30 years is realistic, or necessary, or even beneficial.
“No, and no, and no,” he tells Newsmax, and calls that goal “one of the stupidest ideas that any group has ever come up with.”
Carbon emissions aren’t the boogeyman that climate alarmists claim they are. And by extension, the use of relatively inexpensive fossil fuels as an energy source actually contributes to the health of the planet.
Moore explains that “fossil fuels provide 80 to 85% of the world’s energy,” adding that “fossil fuel is one of the reasons for our longevity, our wealth, and our freedom.”
Even Tesla electric automobile founder Elon Musk agrees that the United States doesn’t produce nearly enough electric power to keep a nation of electric vehicles running. And the unreliability of wind and solar means they’re not the answer.
Moore refers to the relationship between vegetable and animal life on Earth as “a fine cycle of life.” He explains that “plants take in carbon dioxide (CO2) and water and make sugar (glucose), giving off oxygen,” whereas “animals take in oxygen plus sugar, plus starch and oils that plants make from sugar, and give off CO2 and water.”
And the use of fossil fuel supercharges that cycle.
Moore says that “when we burn fossil fuels we are simply returning the CO2 and the water that the trees, plants and plankton absorbed before they were turned into fossil fuels in sediments deep down where the heat ‘cooked’ them.”
He says the fossil fuel’s detractors have a “misguided belief that CO2, the basis for all life, is a dangerous pollutant that will causes climate catastrophe and even end the world.”
The CO2 Coalition was founded to combat this misconception, by “educating thought leaders, policy makers, and the public about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy.”
Moore explains that increased CO2 emissions are actually “beneficial for nature and humanity” in the form of “a large increase in the growth of food crops and forests around the world. This is called the ‘greening of the Earth’ or ‘the CO2 fertilization effect.’”
As proof, Moore refers Newsmax to a February NASA report concluding that “the globe has greened 10% so far this century.”
A move toward fully-renewable energy sources would be foolhardy. It’s unreliable as any Californian can tell you, and it’s prohibitively expensive — amounting to a regressive tax hurting lower incomes the most.
And it’s also dirtier, as the Desert News discovered in an attempt to answer the question, “How ‘green’ is green?”
Massive wind farms and solar arrays have a limited lifespan. When their time runs out, their component parts, including “toxic metals, oil, fiberglass and other material” become “environmental hazards.”
In addition to the projected cost of Biden’s well-intentioned but wrongheaded policy, thousands of jobs have already been eliminated, and projects such as the Keystone XL pipeline have been cancelled in mid-stride.
Finally, the United States is in danger of once-again losing its energy independence, which we achieved in 2019 for the first time since 1957.
Also, because of renewable energy is wildly expensive, it can only survive through government subsidies. Oil, coal, and natural gas, on the other hand, do the opposite and contribute to state and federal coffers.
And don’t let anyone tell you that the science behind climate change is settled. When climate alarmists like Al Gore or John Kerry tell you that, it merely means they don’t wish to debate the issue — possibly because they know they’ll lose.
This article originally appeared at wbap.com]]>