I’m a Pundit

Green lifestyle has come back to the forefront of the public mind in recent years, headed by the train of global warming.  This isnt the first time environmental isues have hit the forefront of the publics attention, with both the 60’s and 70’s having several year periods of environmental attention which waned as quickly as they appeared.

As the new millennium arrived a new catch phrase was spawned by the environmentalists, the Carbon Footprint.  On this they showed how carbon had a direct collations with global warming, and that we made a hell of a lot of it.  They ignored things such as, the graph they used failed to show any of earths warm periods or mini ice ages, warmer temperatures cause carbon level rises from vegetation, this warm period was predicted 800 years ago as part of the earth solar cycle, the type of carbon that effects the earths temperature is around 0.25% of the worlds global carbon production and so on.

Despite the facts to the contrary the political figures began to latch onto the carbon footprint as a vote accumulator, suddenly Environmentalism was a hot topic again.  Government sponsored expeditions were sent to where the ice shelf was melting (While of course ignoring the places where the ice shelves were growing, after all that’s not where the action is happening and can be discounted).

The media jumped into this frenzy with gusto, after all if it buts votes it surely sells newspapers.  Nearly every major newspaper opened up a section on its website and brought in Environmentalist columnists for its papers.  By this point whenever anybody questioned the Carbon Footprint Validity they were shot down with phrases such as “But look how much proof there is!”  Despite all the proof being re-iterated statements from the 1980’s and graphs showing earths temperature and carbon levels rising, which just happens to be a natural phenomenon when the Earth gets closer to the Sun.

People who had spent the last 25 years sat in Indian villages smoking copious amounts of weed appeared yet again, brandishing the environmentalist flag, saying how they had lived at one with nature, ignoring the years they had smoked pesticide drenched ganja for the majority of their desireless lives.

The politicians pretty much all jumped on the Carbon Footprint boat as soon as it became popular in the majority of developed countries.  Nearly every government adopted it as it’s ’save the world’ policy, and it did turn out to be a bit of a vote winner.

Now however as more and more scientists are speaking out that not only is the carbon theory of global warming a load of bullock manure but if carbon WAS causing global warming we should not be investing in reducing it like we currently are.  Instead the government should be spending in long term research for carbon reduction.  Of course the problem with that is long term strategy does not get votes.

Despite the resurgence of environmental popularity however things seem to be dropping off.  Live Earth, designed to be a huge popularity stunt failed miserably when it attracted only 2.2 million American viewers, eclipsed by every other half decent TV program showing at the time.  Despite the campaigns the only real difference in recycling is from the companies that have been forced by law to adapt, and nearly everyone questioned says that despite the dire warnings given over the Earths future they will not change their ways.

The fact of the matter is that for the majority Environmentalism is a fad, Global Warming is an even shorter fad that takes off once every two decades (60’s 80’s 00’s). 

Not only that but some of the more serious environmental agencies (Those who at one point were boosted by the popularity of global warming but now actually want to try and make a difference) have stepped back and taken a look at what their work has achieved.

Due to the carbon footprint campaign

Funding has been lost for 17 new recycling centres

An environmental policy to provide funding for cleaner industry in China failed, meaning the Great Barrier Reef is dying at a faster rate each and every day.

The rain forest is being burnt down at an exceptional speed (Not being logged) to make room for ethanol fuel production. 

Ethanol cannot be transported by pipe so is actually being transported everywhere by Truck and Boat.

3^rd world poverty is increasing because food prices have nearly tripled, in part caused by 1/5^th of world farms turning to ethanol production and increased food transport costs caused by green party led increases in fuel tax (Ethanol is now a mandatory requirement for gasoline and petrol manufacturers to include in their produce creating massive demand)

Tens of thousands of businesses have gone under as peoples livelihoods are destroyed by increased transport costs.

And so on.

It is for this reason that some of these environmental agencies are now calling on politically free research on the topic while concentrating funding on areas that are more substantiated and resolvable.

This is a fantastic move in my opinion, allowing agencies with fantastic resource capability and experience to move into the fields they are most suited to, whether it be saving endangered animals, saving the coral reef or the rainforests. 

The best part is that now realisation has dawned that the publicity surrounding the ‘carbon footprint’ is having a hugely adverse effect on the environment it will hopefully move into the political community, freeing up resource for projects that really can make a difference, here and now.

As the political viewpoint changes, already occurring with the conservatives in the UK, it is becoming more and more apparent that the scientific community is turning more towards the rather apparent concern that there has been a huge mistake has occurred in government sponsored research by the European council.

The main mistake in my opinion is tasking scientists to prove that global warming exists and that it is man made Without putting together a group to prove that Global Warming is natural and if it is infact happening.

Scientific knowledge has progressed over the centuries due to debate and argument, by making a group with a specific goal (And removing over two thirds of the work because it did not agree with what they wanted) they are simply hindering the progress of environmental science for political gain.

written by Oli \\ tags: Carbon Footprint, Global Warming, Green

Bacteria are the life force of this world, they help us digest, they breakdown our waste and of course they create our alcohol.

But Genetic experimentation has taken things just one step further this week.  Scientists have made and tested a bacterium that will eat a common produce, possibly even garbage,  and excrete pure petroleum.

Not only that but for all you Carbon footprint nuts out there this bug actually has a negative carbon footprint, that means that when these bugs are working they will infact consume more carbon than they excrete while creating the petrol. So could this really be a carbon reducing, garbage reducing, environmentally safe way to create petrol and remove America from foreign oil dependence?

Well yes, currently, ermmmm…. one catch though…

You would need a factory the size of Chicago to do so.

The good news is that the scientists who created the fuel pooping bacteria are working hard on refining the bug to increase its productivity and growth.  Who knows in a couple of years we could have home garbage disposal units that make petrol for us!

A man can dream…

written by Oli \\ tags: Environment, Future Technology, Gasoline Excreting Bacteria, Global Warming

I have been following the push of Carbon Credits quite closely.  Carbon Credits basically are an extra tax on any business that goes over a certain level of carbon emissions, based on things such as electricity usage and so forth.

What amuses me slightly is that

The Green Party are pushing for the Carbon credit tax and have arrived at a value

The industrial lobby have been lobbying for business rebates to avoid bankruptcies due to high energy bills.

People are complaining because their energy bills are already high enough, and there is a very real possibility that they will be hit hard by this (Energy producers create a great deal of carbon, the cost of paying this would be passed onto the consumer)

The Government has suggested that out of the estimated 7 trillion dollars raised, 1 trillion is sent to government debt, some is spent on energy efficiency research and the rest is sent back to the tax payer as a rebate.

Ok, so I look at this and what do I see, half the money going back to the industry, half the money going back to the tax payer, a whole load of red tape and extra burden on industries who will have to employ people to figure out their carbon usage, survive the gap before they get their research and so forth.  Meanwhile the taxes will increase by around the extra amount the energy companies have to pay (around $22 a tonne) but that alright because the consumers will get a regular rebate giving them their money back.

Does anyone else see the complete pointlessness of this latest environmental debacle.  I cannot believe there are serious political contenders out there who would consider such a farce in the current recessive economic climate, let alone a strong one.

I think I may move to Australia, last time somebody tried to introduce a red tape tactic there they were sent to jail for a minor offence of treason and damaging the economy, why does that not happen here or in the US?

Politicians are destroying our economy for their own selfish and misguided ideals which they have shrouded by their own self illusion.  Yet even when incompetence is proven there is no backlash, no fines or punishment, half the time jobs are not even lost.

It scares me.

written by Oli \\ tags: America, Carbon Footprint, Europe, Global Warming, Political Fiasco

As an ongoing penchant of the EU to run with the Global Warming Debacle they have once more made another uninformed and politically ridden piece of legistlation to try and increase costs to car users who drive cars with poor fuel emission ratings.

This is a move which has severly handicapped disabled and older people, as well as the agriculture industry and people who live in rural areas.

Many older or people with slight physical difficulties require larger cars, and the agriculture industry is on the verge of being reduced back to the ‘horse and cart, ox and plough’ era as tractors are announced to be non environmentally friendly.

But its nice to know that a European Conference of some of the worlds greatest minds spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of EU taxpayers money to decide that since requiring fuel efficiency to be included in advertising was not having the desired effect it should infact take up a minimum of 20% of the advertising.

Now did it ever occur to these people that many people need larger cars, whether its because tey have a family to move about, friends to give lifts to, goods to transport, people need big cars and no matter how large your advertising is it will not change the fact that a person looking for a people carrier will still buy a people carrier and a single person living in the city will probably buy a smaller car.

Don’t get me wrong, fuel efficiency is important and useful information when buying a car, but automobile advertising accounts for a massive percentage of western advertising, outflanked only by credit cards and followed closely by mobile phones.

Now imagine if these car companies are suddenly forced to  increase their advertising space by 20%, thats 20% more paper used, 20% more trees cut down.

This is scarily close to another recent move on Ethanol, a fuel only transportable by vehicles, where it was decreed by those up on high that gasoline/petrol created for road use must contain at least 5% ethanol, the governmetns even subsidised ethanolproduction world wide.

The result?  The speed the rainforest is being cut down has increased dramatically, with rainforest being burned down (Not logged) at an alarming rate for Palm Oil crops. Transportation of this fuel has greatly increased pollution in these areas and since 20% of worldwide farms are now given to Ethanol production third world countries have seen food prices rocket.

My position in this fiasco is clear, global warming has been proven to be part of a natural cycle caused by the Earths relation to the Sun.  It’s a simple fact that the Earth is in fact leaving an ice age, so bound to be warming up, its also a simple fact that carbon released by the sea increases as it warms up (Creating a nice relational graph, you can do an experiment in a lab to prove this)  and its also true that the graphs and data used to support global warming were debunked well over 25 years ago.

The money spent so far on ‘reducing carbon footprints’ numbrs in the hundreds of millions, and the new EU fund proposed on tackling this looks set to massively increase that.  This is money that could be used to help Britian pull itself out of recession and bankruptcy, it could be used to build new recycling plants, finally researching ways to make them more effective.

It could even be used to feed all those starving families in thirld world countries who have been condemmed to death by western incompetancy.

It seems however that we will just see more insane laws and advertising teling us to be ‘green’ while more and more of us fail to pay mortgages and thirld world countries slide into oblivion as they cannot even afford to eat.

written by Oli \\ tags: Carbon Footprint, Debacle, Environment, Global Warming, Government, Politics, Recycling

Never in all my life have I seen a level of political and economical incompetency equal to that of our government system.

They actually say, and I quote,

“a moratorium would mean missing out on an opportunity to make carbon savings now and reneging on commitments on which biofuels producers had made investments.”

This is basically saying, we can make carbon savings now that make us look good, and we do not disappoint the farmers who have made investments in biofuel production, for instance those that have spent money burning the rainforest.  Don’t worry about THOSE carbon emissions,  they do not count towards our quota.

Yes despite the fact their policies are cutting down rainforest which naturally reduces carbon tehy are pressing ahead to meet their own political targets.  Well done Environmentalists,  Carbon is scientifically provennot to cause global warming but your own unsupported theories that you have pushed to public prominence have taken focus from the worlds real issues and now mean that we are suffering.  Food prices have tripled, thousands more are dieing from hunger and one of the worlds greatest resources the Rainforest,  is not even being cut down, but burned to make way for ethanol crops.

Gordon Brown, Labours most recent stumbling bumbling sock puppet has said that he will look into the situation pending a government review into wether the ethanol subsidies and standards they have set (ie all fuel must have a minimum 5, rising to 10% by 2010 ethanol mix) are causing damage to the environment and starvation in thirdworld countries.

First off, do you really need a government review to see food prices have tripled, or that one in five farms previously used for food is now producing fuel.  Do you really need a government review to see the riots happening because countries can no longer afford food?

On the other hand the National Farms Union (Whos members are now raking in fantastic profits for no extra cost)  representative Peter Kendal said that Biofuels represent the only practical Energy alternative for replacing fossil fuels in transport.  Allthough it is interesting to see that he did not mention electric, which can produce fast cars that travel for hundreds of miles on one charge.

Its re-assuring to know that he is infact jsut an idiot when later he says Biofuels are not the only solution to climate change but only part of a package.

This tpic gets me so wound up, Global warming isn’t going to destroy this world but the people in charge might, tehy do not look at the consequences of their actions, they follow whats popular and they do not fight for their cause.  New Labour? Pah it doesnt even support the labour classes.  The Green Party? They are responsible for a twofold increase in the speed the rainforest is being demolishe, the liberal party? They want to increase the classification of drugs and restrict our freedoms.

The Conservatives, well they just seem to be what every other party is becoming in order to buy votes.

written by Oli \\ tags: , Biofuels, Ethanol, Food, Food Prices, Gordon Brown, Government, Oil

I have kind of a love/hate relationship with Greenpeace, and for that matter a lot of environmental organisations. On the one hand I agree with a lot of their goals, I think what they stand for is a worthy cause and so forth. But unfortunately they are all just SO fucking stupid.

Take for instance the latest debacle. They have today protested outside several Unilever buildings for using suppliers of Palm Oil, used in food and ethanol production. Now it was not that long ago that greenpeace along with pretty much every other environmental agency caught up in the latest fad was proclaiming palm oil to be the saviour to the environmental problems we were facing. They completely ignored sceptics who pointed out what would happen, and as it turns out the sceptics were right.

Due to subsidies enforced thanks to the environmental agencies efforts the rainforst is being cut down at record speeds, not even for lumber just burned down to make farmland. Ethanol cannot be transported by pipeline so is moved in Cargo ships and trucks and world hunger and poverty is increasing as basic food product prices have tripled in recent years.

Of course all this could have been avoided, but all the self righteous ejits in charge jumped on the carbon causes global warming freight train and managed to get their way by creating a public panic over a disproven theory of current global warming. Thanks to their actions a great deal of injustice has been rained down upon our planet, thanks fucktards.

Instead of media grabbing hype promoting idiots in charge of this so called charity I really do think they should tackle some real issues of pollution rather than continuing to support the global warming nightmare that was disproven in the 80s.

Take the mass destruction of the rainforest, the money spent on ’sponsored’ research into global warming could have paid for the protection of huge tracts of the rainforest.  Not a fan of jungles?   Perhaps the hundreds of millions invested in the global warming vote buy in could have cleaned up the great barrier reef.

Global warming is all well and good for votes and donations but personally I would be more concerned about the biological miracle providing our oxygen than a degree or two temprature change.

written by Oli \\ tags: Environment, Global Warming, Green Peace