Climate cultists have been screeching for years that CO2, what they call “carbon” and “carbon pollution”, is the control knob for Earth’s temperature, and the root of all Evil when released from Mankind. So, if that’s the case, one would think that there would be a dip in global temperatures from the reduced release this year, right?
Fact check: The coronavirus pandemic isn’t slowing climate change
The claim: Drops in carbon emissions aren’t enough to significantly curb climate change
With the coronavirus pandemic shutting down most global activity, a consequent crash in global carbon emissions has been widely reported.
While analysts agree the historic lockdowns will significantly lower emissions, some environmentalists argue the drop is nowhere near enough.
This is really a “fact check” from USA Today, but, let’s look at interesting stuff
“Hey so it turns out that the people of earth accidentally did a global experiment to see if every individual could course correct climate change through mass personal change of habits, and it turns out, no! We can’t!,â€Â a Facebook post shared more than 4,000 times reads.
The post shares a screenshot of another post that links to a Scientific American article with the chatter, “Despite all the ‘natural is healing’ commentary global CO2 emissions have not considerably declined during the pandemic. This suggests emissions levels relate less to individual behavior than larger structural factors only addressable through regulation.”
Are you enjoying your test drive of a Cult of Climastrology policy world? Would you like it if they took care of all those “structural factors”, so, no more shipping of food, clothes, and so forth, among other things? What this is is Warmists looking for reasons to make sure no one questions their “control knob” talking points.
Because changes in the climate are the result of decades of accumulating greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, one year of slightly falling emissions will not counter long-term effects, Hall said.
“Those emissions took place over of the past several decades,†he said. “To affect ongoing and future climate change, the recent emissions drop would have to be sustained over a much longer period than the likely duration of the coronavirus outbreak.â€
Always some sort of excuse.
Emissions would need to drop by more than 25% to see a total drop in the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, and thus slow an annual global rise in temperatures, Houlton explained.
Even if it was Mankind’s output of CO2 that’s driving this, we’re talking an increase of hundreds of a degree.
Kenneth Gillingham, a climate economist at Yale University, also cautioned that current emissions reductions were not sustainable, because they’re the result of economic fallout rather a planned structural reduction in carbon emissions.
“The positive environmental impacts from COVID-19 are a silver lining but not something to be applauded,†he said. Gillingham was optimistic that some people and businesses would keep new habits like reduced commuting and increased telework after the coronavirus was contained.
Tell you what: let the Warmists do this, and let’s see what happens with them as a control group.
A temporary drop in CO2 emissions will not reverse warming.
Atmospheric CO2 has increased from 280 ppm 150 years ago to 415 ppm now. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for years, and we add CO2 to the atmosphere faster than it leaves. Even if CO2 emissions drop, atmospheric CO2 continues to rise.
So much for “science”.
Jeff,
So you are saying that your tax would not have any influence. So, why do you want the tax?
david,
The solution is to reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Please note that CO2 emissions differ from CO2 concentration.
Nature does that.
You just try to reverse it.
Because Lefties never met a tax they didn’t love.
Starting again from the false premise that we need a “solutionâ€. A solution to what?