www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Global Warming

Just curious what forum members opinions on this increasingly popular topic of debate is ?

The opinion I hold, or should I say that I concur with, is that the earth has already been experiencing a series of climate changes that are well documented throughout history, i,e, The Medieval Warm Period 800-1300, The Little Ice Age 1300-1850. So, I'm not about about to jump onboard the Kyoto bandwagon, and throw away our sovereignty, regardless of how long this heatwave lasts. At the same time, I am also pro-environment and applaud the Brazilians for what they've been doing with polution reducing flex fuel.

Isn't the majority of Brazilian oil expected to come from traditional drilling? It seems like I remember reading that, despite their usage of alternative fuels as well.

I'm all for Kyoto (but not about squabbling on the details). We are the world's biggest polluter and we won't do a thing about it. Kyoto is interesting in that it has target reductions of five key greenhouse gases and yet allows the nations to purchase units from each other, meaning if one nation is doing quite well then they can be rewarded financially for it by selling to a nation that is running behind. It also assures that all greenhouse gases are lowered to a set level and does not control which countries that reduction will come from. I think it is a very creative plan.

However, I also recognize that the earth has verifiable warming and cooling trends throughout time. The difference between a scorcher and an ice age is not all that much temperature-wise. And if we are already in a warming trend, I don't want to be adding to it. I also am aware of the effects of air pollution on my own lungs and on my family's immediate and direct health. I think we have a long way to go to change the public mentality to one which appreciates the resources we are given. I'm not an environmental whacko, but I do think that we need to take better collective care of the earth.

Wondering,

We have done much to curb pollution. We don't need Kyoto to do it, we are ahead of the curve. If you think our pollution is bad you've quickly forgotten Russia and neither is anything compared with China and what it will become in short order.

CDL

China is the SECOND largest polluter, behind only us. We are doing well in a "decrease" of greenhouse gas consumption, which is actually a fancy way of saying we aren't increasing as much per year but we are still increasing our consumption. (Isn't the phrase "fuzzy math"?)

We did sign the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which is a positive thing. It has no enforcement, though. I don't think the Kyoto Protocol is going to be the country or the world's salvation. I do think a mentality (like the rest of the industrialised world has shown) which takes into consideration the stewardship of the resources God has given us is something lacking in corporate America. If not Kyoto, then what? Nothing is filling the void. The fuzzy math which shows an 18% decrease in consumption when we are actually using more carbon fuel is not exactly progress to cheer about.

I saw a PBS show recently where one scientist posited that the brown cloud is actually PROTECTING us from more damaging rays of the sun, given that the ozone layer has such a huge hole in it.

However, he also says that the weather pattern that created the Sahara Desert is slowly taking over Africa, which is why there has been so much drought and famine there in recent years.

I don't advocate giving up our sovereignty, but in addition to creating more environmentally friendly vehicles to reduce pollution, I think we need to SERIOUSLY explore energy sources other than fossil fuels.

And we need to be better stewards in regard to how much we thoughtlessly waste. We've created a lifestyle of wastefulness that others are now emulating or hoping to emulate. When I was in Germany back in 1970, most people carried a string tote bag with them to the small butcher shops, green grocers, bakeries, etc. (There were few supermarkets with prepackaged foods.) Purchases weren't prepackaged in plastic and styrofoam (made with petroleum) but carefully wrapped in just the right amount of paper and placed in the buyer's own reusable bag. (BTW, I just gave my 1970 German bag to a homeless man who wanted it to carry his possessions. It was more durable than the plastic grocery bag he was using.)

China may be the biggest polluter now, but think what we would be if we had THEIR population AND our per capita consumption!

Sophia

Sophia,
It is my understanding that the US is the biggest polluter and China is second. Do you have anything I should look at?

Another negative aspect of air pollution that I forgot to mention earlier is the acidification of the surface waters which destroys aquatic life. Off-shore oil drilling is a major contributor of pollution (which is a timely point considering the Senate's current legislation). And an interesting one is that heat itself is a cause of pollution because it kills aquatic life which then pollute the water. We are already going to have an increase in natural pollution because of that, which means simply maintaining the status quo will be worse for us in the future and that we must reduce our pollution (and not simply curb the increase).

Wondering,

I'm not defending our lifestyle. We ought to have continued to build nuclear power plants. Yet, we stopped because we were afraid of accidents and weren't sure about storage of fuel rods. Many other industrialized nations continued to build them which accounts for the fact that they don't pollute as much. China's demand for oil is the single greatest factor in the rise of the price of crude. $80.00 per barrel is nothing compared with what it will soon be. This rise in price will do wonders in making other fuel sources more affordable.

The glass really is half full.

CDL

As many have said, earth's climate has changed often, and has often changed extremely. I don't want to argue about global warming, but I am certainly for the development of alternative fuels. Not only would they be cleaner, but might free us from those bandits in the Middle East. I get the feeling everytime I buy gas, that I am helping fund terrorists and extremists in that part of the world.

I cannot believe that China and India are not the biggest polluters in the world. Neither country has the myriad of enviornmental laws and regulations and agencies that the US has. I do know that people can make numbers say whatever they want, so statistics can be meaningless.

Yeah, the US consumes a lot (and we pay for it!), but it is the world's most efficient producer of goods and services. Radical envoirnmentalists like to point the finger at the US and our "energy consumption". Well, it stand to reason that an average person in the US will use more energy than a poor family in Peru that lives in a corrugated tin shack and a dirt floor.

By golly, Mr. Clean! We ought to flaggelate ourselves until we all live in corrugated boxes and produce next to nothing. Then we wouldn't polluted and we'd be able to relax alot more. Of course we'd be as poor as the third world, but that's a small price to pay. :rolleyes:

CDL

I think that statement maybe a bit of generalisation and sprinkled in with a handful of patriotism.

Which good and service is the US efficient for? Certainly not the steel industry - TATA Steel owns that record.

The World Bank claims "the world's largest financier of social services."

Australia claims to be the "world's most efficient producers of energy and emission-intensive goods."

StatOil claims to be the "world's most environmentally - efficient producers and transporters of oil and gas."

The US does have the edge on being "the world's most competitive producers for most goods and services." According to the Heritage Foundation, which I usually take with a grain or two of salt...

CDL said:

I remember way back in the 1960s when Dr. Zhivago came out. There was a scene when they showed Antonia's family having a bunch of proletariats moved into their mansion. I think the line spoken by the comrade was: "Fourteen people could live in this room!"

There's no need to go back to shacks with corrugated roofs, but why does a family of 4 need a 4,000 sq. ft. house? Why do individual families need their own backyard swimming pools and hot tubs? Why does anyone need a Hummer??? All of these use much more energy than needed for their purposes.

We live in a society that's hell-bent on consumerism for its own sake. We invented the concept and coined the term "planned obsolesence." We're extremely wasteful in our covetousness and desire to have the biggest, best and most expensive, regardless of what we need and what others might need. And I think that's sinful.

Sophia

Sophia, anyone who can live like that obviously doesn't do it on a teacher's salary, I can assure you of that!

Dear Sophia you said:

I say:

It's pathetic that we have to constantly 'buy' so that people in the third world can live. Frankly our whole economic system is off, and I fear the consequences of the interdependency the world has on one another. What if some catastrophy hits? We are all going to starve, or at least those in many parts of the world will.

I know that some parts of this great economic boom is great, especially when one goes to the stores and see's the immense artistic talent on display. Yet it would be wonderful if we could live in communities that could generate at least some part of their electricity, and maybe have a small factory that could make some of the shoes they wear, and/or grow some of the food they eat. :rolleyes:

Frankly I think our whole economic system is leading to the advent of the anti-christ and his control of the world. Yikes!

Zenovia

Hi, Sophia (and everyone else) -

Sure, capitalism and a free society have their drawbacks. But this begs the question - even if it is sinful, how do you change it in a sinless way? The Communists thought the same way, but their solution wound up being far worse than the problem they were trying to solve.

Perhaps it's best to err on the side of freedom - even if that means some people have better "stuff" than others. As a great prophet* once said, "If money is all you love, then that's what you'll receive."

(* bonus points if you know his/her name )