By Alan Caruba
Having
spent decades trying to convince everyone that carbon dioxide (CO2) was a
“greenhouse gas” that was going to cause the Earth to heat up, the same
environmental charlatans are now embarking on a campaign to do the same with
methane. In the U.S. the first move was announced by the White House in late
March.
The carbon
dioxide hoax fell apart in the wake of a cooling cycle affecting the Earth that
began around 1997 and continues to this day. Warming and cooling cycles are
natural events and both are tied to the activity or lack of it of the Sun. Humans have nothing to do with the climate
other to enjoy or endure it.
Why
methane? It has a lot to do with the development of hydraulic fracturing,
commonly called “fracking”, and the way it unlocks natural gas, aka methane,
all of which portends an America that is energy independent, along with its
huge reserves of coal and oil. If, of course, the government permits this to
occur.
As we
know, the Obama administration does not want that. It would mean more jobs,
greater prosperity, and the ability to pay down the national debt, not to
mention drive down the cost of electricity, gasoline, and everything else that
depends on energy.
Despite
the cooling cycle that is likely to last for many more years, Steve Hamburg,
chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, was quoted by the
Washington Post saying that “ounce for ounce, methane is 84 times as potent as
a greenhouse gas over 20 years” compared to carbon dioxide. “More than a third of
the warming that we’ll see as a result of today’s emissions over the next
couple of decades comes from, essentially, methane. We need to remain focused
on carbon dioxide emissions, but doing so is not enough.”
Excuse me,
but the Environmental Defense Fund and countless other Green advocacy groups
have been focused on carbon dioxide for decades and the Earth is cooling, not
warming. What part of this does Hamburg not understand?
James M.
Taylor, the managing editor of Environment & Climate News, a national
monthly published by The Heartland Institute, reported in January that “Natural
gas fracking is not causing a spike in the U.S. methane emissions”, citing
Environmental Protection Agency data. “Methane emissions specific to natural
gas are in a long-term decline, down ten percent since 1990 and down seven
percent since 2007 when the fracking boom began.”
The
Washington Post, however, asserted that emission levels “are set to rise by
2030 as shale oil and shale gas production expands in the United States.” Do
you remember all those predictions about the increase of carbon dioxide
emissions and how, in ten, twenty, fifty or a hundred years, the Earth would
heat up?
This is
not about methane, it is about finding a way to shut down fracking and the extraction
of natural gas and oil in the same way the Obama administration’s “war on coal”
has caused the loss of over 150 coal-fired plants that until it began, were
providing electricity. Reducing sources of electricity drives up its cost to
everyone. As more natural gas came on line by 2013 it had become the second
greatest source of U.S. electricity, but overall the amount of electricity produced
was less than in 2007 before the war on coal began.
A natural
component of the Earth, it has a number of sources, but one that has also
caught the eye of government regulators involves cow flatulence and belching.
The White
House has proposed cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25% by
2020. The Environmental Protection Agency has been tracking cow farts since 2012
and now the dairy industry has to worry along with the oil and gas industry. In
addition to the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management will be announcing “new
standards this fall to reduce venting and flaring from oil and gas production
on public lands.”
It’s often
best just to let the Greens speak for themselves, revealing their never-ending
efforts to attack the energy industry that keeps our lights on, heats and cools
our homes, and fuels our cars and trucks. “President Obama’s plan to reduce
climate-disrupting methane pollution is an important step in reining in an out
of control industry exempt from too many public health protections,” said
Deborah Nardone, the director of the Sierra Club’s Keeping Dirty Fuels in the
Ground campaign.
“However,”
said Ms. Nardone, “even with the most rigorous methane controls in place, we
will still fall short of what is needed to fight climate disruption if we do
not reduce our reliance on these dirty fossil fuels.”
What the
heck is a climate disruption? A blizzard, a hurricane, a flood, tornadoes? None
of these phenomena have anything to do with using fossil fuels. This is the
kind of utter drivel we have all been hearing for decades.
It has
nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with denying access and use
of the greatest reserves of coal, oil and natural gas that exist in the
greatest nation on Earth, the United States of America.
© Alan
Caruba, 2014
2 comments:
I've read that methane has 25 times the global warming effect of co2 a lot.
First time seeing an 84X claim.
Here's the thing though. There are planets literally awash in methane that show zero global warming effect.
The Moon Titan has a 5% methane atmosphere and the same surface temperature as it's naked, bare rock, neighboring moon, Hyperion.
When a global warming cheerleader from a Steyer funded advocacy group claims a different laws of physics for his pet cause, you know he is a liar.
Hell. If he opens his pie hole at all, you know he's a liar.
I agree.
Anyway, it is not the first time (even if the matter is "strangely" kept under cover, that the equivalency between CH4 and CO2 moleculas is pinpointed to be very different from what the UN-IPCC was supporting in his AR2.
Look at the 2011 Study released by the Cornell University - Ithaca/NY-USA, titled: "Methane and GHG footprint of natural gas from shale formation".
Useful reading. Than, help to fight this huge total speculation and ideology by the usual greens lobbies.
Post a Comment