Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘radical environmentalism’

CNN Finds Bright Side to Tens of Thousands of COVID Deaths: The Air Is Cleaner


Reported By Johnathan Jones | Published April 15, 2020 at 8:37am

As governments race to contain the spread of COVID-19, and citizens across the world deal with the health, financial and emotional tolls of the disease, CNN has found the silver lining: Cleaner air! The network’s early Saturday morning B-team went up to bat this past weekend as people slept and airports, which always seem to air CNN’s coverage, were ghost townsStill, for anyone who might have been watching, the network paraded widespread, draconian lockdowns as an efficacious solution to climate change.

While you’d be hard-pressed to find a sane individual who is content with the current state of life on the planet, CNN gleefully used the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic to suggest social and economic reforms in order to deal with climate change.

CNN early morning anchor Natalie Allen welcomed meteorologist Derek Van Dam during a segment in the 5 a.m. block of the network’s Saturday coverage, according to the Media Research Center. Both Allen and Van Dam were a bit too cheerful in reporting that some folks in India can see the Himalayan mountain range from 100 miles away, due to the absence of smog with the country shut down.

“[India] has been under lockdown for more than two weeks, and that has dramatically improved the air quality and visibility,” Allen said.

Allen and Van Dam, who was reporting from his basement, didn’t stop at marveling at this phenomenon.

Speaking to Van Dam, Allen added, “This is often a topic we talk about here at CNN, and, finally, you know, this is a bright spot in this era of pandemic, like, bring on the electric cars and, you know, climate — solving climate change isn’t that hard.”

“Preaching to the choir right there, Natalie,” Van Dam replied. “You know, I like to consider myself an optimist, and I think you could probably relate to this — just on my daily run today across midtown Atlanta, where we live, the skies have never been this blue, in my opinion.”

“There’s virtually no car traffic, no airline traffic taking place out of Atlanta’s Hartsfield International Airport — of course a few planes, but virtually nothing compared to what it would normally be on any given day. And, yeah, there’s just less air pollution,” the meteorologist concluded.

Van Dam then essentially asked Allen to picture a world where people are forced to live under permanent government control in order to save the planet from climate change.

“Can you imagine if our response to the climate crisis equaled that of the robust nature of the COVID-19 response? Where would we be, Natalie?” he asked.

“I know. That’s a very good question that we all should ponder. And I’m with you,” Allen responded. “I’ve been marveling at the blue sky in Atlanta. It’s just been magnificent.”

It’s probably safe to assume most people would take a hard pass at living life in its current state on a permanent basis. But when you look at the economic toll of the coronavirus, it is essentially what Democrats have pushed for when discussing Green New Deal legislation. Various models of the outrageously expensive environmental plan would essentially force people to use public transportation and do away with most commercial air travel. A Green New Deal would equate to food shortages, large-scale rationing, limited travel and a government takeover of the majority of the economy, as regulations would slowly strong-arm working people into becoming wards of the state.

If anything, CNN has made a strong case against sweeping climate change measures, because we’re essentially living under them already — and they’re no fun. It’s great that a few people in India got a chance to see the Himalayas for a while.

Hopefully, sooner rather than later, those people are going to have to move a bit closer if they want that same view.

Unlike CNN’s climate activists, Americans are ready to fire up the economic engine that has made this country so unique, because we want our lives back.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Scam of the Century: Scientific Study Destroys Electric Car Debate


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | Published April 23, 2019 at 9:49am

If you think you’re saving the environment by driving a Tesla, well, let me let you in on a bit of a secret: You could perhaps emit less carbon if you went with a diesel car. The findings of a new study by a group of German scientists seem counterintuitive at first. They found that electric vehicles in their home country accounted for more emissions than those smoggy diesels. Until, that is, you realize that “zero emissions” vehicles aren’t really so zero emissions.

“When CO2 emissions linked to the production of batteries and the German energy mix — in which coal still plays an important role — are taken into consideration, electric vehicles emit 11% to 28% more than their diesel counterparts, according to the study, presented on Wednesday at the Ifo Institute in Munich,” the Brussels Times reported.

“Mining and processing the lithium, cobalt and manganese used for batteries consume a great deal of energy,” the report said. “A Tesla Model 3 battery, for example, represents between 11 and 15 tons of CO2.

“Given a lifetime of 10 years and an annual travel distance of 15,000 kilometres, this translates into 73 to 98 grams of CO2 per kilometre, scientists Christoph Buchal, Hans-Dieter Karl and Hans-Werner Sinn noted in their study.”

When you factor in the energy needed to charge the batteries, this ups that total to 156 to 180 grams of CO2 per kilometer.

The study’s authors recommended that instead of pushing for the adoption of “zero emission” electric cars, European officials should instead move toward other sources of power for automobiles — namely methane, “whose emissions are one-third less than those of diesel motors.”

This, by the way, is hardly the only study that’s questioned whether electric cars are really as environmentally friendly as their proponents claim. A 2017 study by researchers at the University of Michigan found that the amount of CO2 emitted by electric cars varied wildly by country, but it certainly wasn’t zero.

“The report — authored by Michael Sivak and Brandon Schoettle — notes that an electric car recharged by a coal-fired plant produces as much CO2 as a gasoline-powered car that gets 29 miles per gallon,” Investors Business Daily reported. “(For context, the average mpg of all the cars, SUVs, vans and light trucks sold in the U.S. over the past year is 25.2 mpg.) A plug-in recharged by a natural gas-powered plant is like driving a car that gets 58 miles per gallon.

“Solar, wind and geothermal do far better on this score, but they generate a small portion of the nation’s electricity. More than 64% of electricity is generated by coal, natural gas or other fossil fuels.

“The U of M researchers calculate that, given the energy mix in the U.S., the average plug-in produces as much CO2 as a conventional car that gets 55.4 miles per gallon.”

That’s not terrible, but it’s not great, either. And keep in mind, the cost of electricity goes up the more renewables you throw into the mix, which dissuades people from adopting them.

For other countries, the cars fare even worse. In China, which has been pushing widespread adoption of electric vehicles, the cars put out as much CO2 as a car that gets 40 miles per gallon.

“And even this exaggerates the environmental benefits of electric cars because the report doesn’t take into account the additional CO2 emissions involved in making batteries,”the IBD report said.

“A separate study from the Union of Concerned Scientists found that, depending on the type of plug-in being built, manufacturing a battery-powered car generates anywhere from 15% to 68% more CO2 emissions than a conventional gas-powered car,”the report said. “The reason is that producing the batteries is incredibly energy intensive.”

Now, if you like owning an electric car, that’s fine. But if your reason for owning it is that you think you’re doing the environment a favor, you’re wrong. The idea that these vehicles have “zero emissions” might be one of the biggest scams of the 21st century, particularly given how expensive renewable energy currently is. No matter what owners of these vehicles may believe, smug can’t eliminate smog.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: