BOGOTA, Aug. 1 (Xinhua) — Colombian President Alvaro Uribe on Friday proposed that the anti-narcotics drive be added to the campaign against global warming, since drug traffickers destroyed jungles to make room for illegal plantations.
This is the kind of thing that annoys the hell out of me with anthropogenic global warming. Why does saving the jungles have to be part of global warming? It is an issue that can stand on its own.
(phillyBurbs)In a recent major address, former Vice President Al Gore called for a 10-year plan to move the nation’s energy supply to solar, wind, and other renewable sources. What he failed to address is the massive role of meat production in the global climate crisis.
A 2006 report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization found that animal agriculture accounts for fully 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. That’s more than automobiles! (www.CoolYourDiet.org).
Carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, is emitted by burning forests to create animal pastures and by combustion of fossil fuels to operate feed growing tractors, factory farm and slaughterhouse machinery, trucks, and refrigeration equipment. The much more damaging methane and nitrous oxide are discharged from digestive tracts of cattle and from animal waste cesspools, respectivelyThe good news is that each of us can do our part to reduce global warming. Our supermarket stocks a variety of soy-based lunch “meats,†hotdogs, veggie burgers, dairy products, and frozen dinners. There are fruits and vegetables readily available. More details are at www.tryveg.com.
The good news is that each of us can do our part to reduce global warming. Our supermarket stocks a variety of soy-based lunch “meats,†hotdogs, veggie burgers, dairy products, and frozen dinners. There are fruits and vegetables readily available. More details are at www.tryveg.com.
This one should make Silke happy, because that is a report that I mostly agree with. However, CO2 is not the chief greenhouse gas, water vapor is. And methane is a much stronger greenhouse gas then CO2, as well. Depending on the source, it is anywhere from 25-60 times stronger.
Anyhow, the problem here is, if the world switches from an agricultural output which includes meat animals to one which is just plants, you get the same problem, as plants produce methane, too. So do people who live the vegan lifestyle in abundance, if you know what I mean. Doing away with much of the food supply is not going to be a popular position.
We also see much of the AGW crowds position: to sell you something.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post is noticing what the rest of us have
We’re heading into the heart of hurricane season, and any day now, a storm will barrel toward the United States, inspiring all the TV weather reporters to find a beach where they can lash themselves to a palm tree. We can be certain of two things: First, we’ll be told that the wind is blowing very hard and the surf is up. Second, some expert will tell us that this storm might be a harbinger of global warming.
Somewhere along the line, global warming became the explanation for everything. Right-thinking people are not supposed to discuss any meteorological or geophysical event — a hurricane, a wildfire, a heat wave, a drought, a flood, a blizzard, a tornado, a lightning strike, an unfamiliar breeze, a strange tingling on the neck — without immediately invoking the climate crisis. It causes earthquakes, plagues and backyard gardening disappointments. Weird fungus on your tomato plants? Classic sign of global warming.
Good op-ed, read the whole thing.
The only part I will dispute with Joel Achenbach is when he writes at the beginning of paragraph 6Â “Seems to me that it’s inherently impossible to prove a causal connection between climate and weather — they’re just two different things.” Actually, no. Weather is part of climate. Pure and simple. And Climate can effect weather. There are other components of climate, sure, but weather is a big one.
However, CO2 is not the chief greenhouse gas, water vapor is. And methane is a much stronger greenhouse gas then CO2, as well. Depending on the source, it is anywhere from 25-60 times stronger.
But there is far less methane in the atmosphere than CO2. This is why CO2 is measured in parts per million while methane is measured in parts per billion.
What is your source for this information and why do you accept the scientific finding of the FAO (Livestock’s Long Shadow, 2007) and not the IPCC (Fourth Assessment Report, 2008)?
I do understand the criticism made in the Washington Post Op-Ed that, “somewhere along the line, global warming became the explanation for everything.†But I see this as more of a criticism of the mainstream media and some politicians. Though it’s not unreasonable to see a link between unprecedented amounts of forest fires in California during times that are hotter and drying for longer periods, some of the links have been taken to ridiculous extremes.
But that is a separate issue from whether AGW itself is supported by the scientific evidence.