EARTH DAY'S CREDIBILITY DAMAGED BY DOMINANCE OF CLIMATE ACTIVISTS
Legitimate environmental concerns being shortchanged by focus on bogus global warming scare
By Tom Harris
Ottawa, Canada, April 22, 2013: "Earth Day participants must distance themselves from the climate scare or risk the event degenerating into irrelevance,” said
Tom Harris, executive director of the Ottawa-based
International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC). Noting the intense climate focus in this year’s
Earth Day Network advertising, Harris warned, “As the hypothesis that humanity’s carbon dioxide (CO
2) emissions are causing dangerous global warming falls into disrepute, all those associated with the climate alarm will also lose credibility.”
ICSC Science Advisory Board member,
Dr. Tim Ball, former University of Winnipeg climatology professor, explained, “All sensible people are environmentalists. We all want clean air, land and water and to protect species at risk to the degree possible considering the many other important demands on society.”
“But controlling global climate through restricting emissions is unscientific nonsense,” Ball continued. “The greenhouse gas most under attack by climate campaigners, CO2, is a benefit to the environment, its rise resulting in more crop yield and a densification of forests.”
ICSC Chief Science Advisor
Dr. Bob Carter, of James Cook University in Australia pointed out that, “The global temperature statistic has not risen since 1997 despite an increase in emissions of 8%. This nullifies the main argument presented by climate campaigners.”
“Climate changes all the time, and it is important that civil hazard organisations are prepared for its extremes,” said Carter. “But as demonstrated by the
Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, of which I am a contributing author, there are thousands of scientists and peer-reviewed science papers that refute the hypothesis that human emissions of CO
2 are causing dangerous warming.”
ICSC Energy Issues Advisor power consultant
Bryan Leyland of New Zealand added, “Yet hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent subsidizing wind, solar and wave power in an effort to reduce CO
2 emissions. None of these new renewable energy technologies can provide electricity when needed during times of peak demand. All of them are at the mercy of the wind, sun, tides and waves. In addition, the capacity factor—the ratio of the average output to the maximum output—varies between 10% and seldom exceeds 40%. So, for instance, 1000 Megawatt (MW) coal or nuclear power stations each generate the same amount of energy as several thousand MW of renewable energy. Regardless, independent research shows that they do little to reduce emissions of CO
2, a gas that promotes plant growth and, as we now know, has no measurable effect on the climate.”
“Coal, natural gas, hydro and nuclear power can provide a reliable supply of all the electricity we need for the foreseeable future, and at a low cost,” said Leyland. “Expensive and intermittent renewable energy technologies can never play more than a bit part in electricity generation.”
Ball provides a sample of how climate alarmism has resulted in the misappropriation of funds worldwide: “Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent
said last monththat ‘Canada has invested more than $10 billion since 2006 to reduce greenhouse gases, to improve energy efficiency, to develop green infrastructure.’ But, overall energy efficiency has actually declined as politicians like Kent have forced so-called “green” alternate energy sources on society to appease climate campaigners. Had the $10 billion been spent on reducing pollution and improving and expanding existing energy sources such as coal-fired electricity generation, both the economy and the environment would be in far better shape.”
This author concludes, “It is crucially important that practical environmentalists dissociate the movement from ideologically-driven climate activists. Otherwise, society will throw Earth Day, and indeed the whole environmental movement, into the dustbin of history.”
________________________________________________________________________________
The ICSC is a non-partisan group of scientists, economists and energy and policy experts who are working to promote better understanding of climate science and related policy worldwide. We aim to help create an environment in which a more rational, open discussion about climate issues emerges, thereby moving the debate away from implementation of costly and ineffectual “climate control” measures. Instead, ICSC encourages effective planning for, and adaptation to, inevitable natural climate variability, and continuing scientific research into the causes and impacts of climate change.
ICSC also focuses on publicizing the repercussions of misguided plans to “solve the climate crisis”. This includes, but is not limited to, “carbon” sequestration as well as the dangerous impacts of attempts to replace conventional energy supplies with wind turbines, solar power, most biofuels and other ineffective and expensive energy sources.
________________________________________________________________________________
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Canada
Professor Robert (Bob) M. Carter, PhD, Hon. FRSNZ
Chief Science Advisor, International Climate Science Coalition
Emeritus Fellow, Institute for Public Affairs, Melbourne
Marine Geophysical Laboratory
James Cook University
Townsville, Queensland, 4811
Australia
Phone (mobile): +61-(0)419-701-139
Phone (evening): +61-(0)7-4775-1268
Bryan Leyland,
M.Sc., FIEE, FIMechE, FIPENZ, consulting engineer
Energy Issues Advisor, International Climate Science Coalition
Auckland 1022
New Zealand
Phone: +64 9 940 7047; mobile: +64 21 978 996
Professor Ole Humlum, PhD
Science Advisory Board member, International Climate Science Coalition
Professor of Physical Geography, Department of Physical Geography
Institute of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Phone: +47 79 02 33 00 (department); +47 79 02 33 20 (direct). Fax: +47 79 02 33 01.
No comments:
Post a Comment