Is the war on plant food sustainable?

Sustainability is the trojan horse that the global environmentalists have used to smuggle a crippling burden of red and green tape into the law and regulations of the western world.

The biggest play in their book is the threat to life on earth posed by human emissions of carbon dioxide. Hence the War on CO2.

Truth is not just a casualty, it was killed to get the war started. Wars are expensive and this one is costing trillions. Wars call for heroic sacrifices as well, so the cost of electric power has doubled as we inject more and more intermittent energy into the grid.

But this part of the war on CO2 is itself not sustainable because in the absence of storage there has to be 100% backup for wind and solar power. How much more needs to be said?

There is more. Spending that much money to increase power prices and undermine energy security plus the damage to human beings and the planet looks plain crazy given that the objective is to reduce the supply of plant food. We were reminded yesterday that most plants evolved with CO2 levels in the range 1500ppm to 4000ppm so the level of 400 ppm at present represents almost a starvation diet. What is more, how can people claim that increasing CO2 will generate unbearable temperatures if plants evolved when the atmosphere contained far more CO2 than we enjoy at present. How come there was no problem with warming then?

BTW on advice from mem I have ordered Lynne Balzer The Green New Deal and Climate Change.

PS. Are they learning about the trojan horse in school these days?

To keep the number of posts down I may add other climate items to this post during the day. Our server has trouble when posts proliferate.

The Salvatore Babones Newsletter on line.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Is the war on plant food sustainable?

  1. stackja

    Should not those concerned, just depart the earth?

  2. egg_

    Sustainability is the trojan horse that the global environmentalists have used to smuggle a crippling burden of red and green tape into the law and regulations of the western world.

    Dragging the West down to Third World sh1thole standards?
    We’re almost there.

  3. Rex Mango

    Very fortunate sustainability as a word wasn’t invented till the late 20th Century. It could have killed the Industrial Revolution stone dead if Shakespeare had used it.

  4. Sustainability my ar$e.
    We didn’t give up stones because we were running out of stones in the stone age.
    We certainly won’t be giving up coal and gas because we’re running out of them. If we give them up, it’ll be because better and CHEAPER alternatives will be developed. Wind and sunshine ain’t it.

    By the way, did you know that 150 years ago, the biggest and clearest environmental disaster waiting to happen was horse $hit? That’s right, all those beasts of burden crapping everywher. In cities, towns and villages, horse $hit was the biggest pollution and people didn’t know what to do with it all.

    Did you know horses $hit up to 12 times per day? Imagine the mountains of the stuff that had to be scooped up and loaded on yet more horse, mule and ox driven carts and transported away from towns and cities and dumped on huge piles, hopefully before not too many maggots infested the piles of $hit.

    We didn’t need government taxes or legislation to fix that clear and present environmental danger. Coal, oil and gas came to the rescue.
    Coal, oil and gas have been the saviours of the environment. Imagine the millions of acres of fertile land no longer needed to grow food to feed the hundreds of millions of beasts of burden. All liberated for other uses thanks to coal, oil and gas.

    There ended the lesson for the stupid little Gretas of this World.

Comments are closed.