We’re Number 2! We’re Number 2!  We’re Number 2!

China overtakes U.S. as top polluter 

China has overtaken the United States as the top emitter of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, because of surging energy use amid an economic boom, a Dutch government-funded agency said on Wednesday.

Other experts have estimated that China will only surpass the United States in coming years. The rise to number one emitter may put pressure on Beijing to do more to help a UN-led fight against global warming.

“China’s 2006 carbon dioxide emissions surpassed those of the United States by 8 per cent,” the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said in a statement. In 2005, it said China’s emissions were 2 per cent below those of the United States.

This comes as yet another blow to Al Gore’s lie-fest movie, where he was heard to gravely pronounce that China is “on the cutting edge of environmentalism”…yea, they figure out how to pollute way better then us.  Now that’s cutting edge.

But don’t worry alarmists…it is still not only our fault as a nation, but our responsibility to fox it.  Why?

The environmentalists still blame us more, because while China may dump more total emissions into the atmosphere, but apparently we do more pollution per person.

Developing nations say countries with the highest per capita emissions should show the way. U.S. President George W. Bush has said China and other developing nation must do more.

With a population of 1.3 billion, China’s per capita emissions are a quarter of those in the United States, with 300 million people.

The Group of Eight leading industrial nations agreed at a summit in early June to make “substantial cuts” in emissions and to try to work out a global treaty by 2009 to succeed the Kyoto Protocol. Kyoto binds 35 rich nations to cut emissions to 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2008-12.

The fault in their logic is quickly obvious.  If your concern is CO2 emissions, then making useless distinctions about who is worse per person is not as important as cutting overall emissions.  Not that I believe the alarmists and their chicken little tales of how effective it will be, but at least they can be intellectually honest.

But don’t worry.  It won’t matter when the new Ice Age gets here.

Read the sunspots

The mud at the bottom of B.C. fjords reveals that solar output drives climate change - and that we should prepare now for dangerous global cooling

Politicians and environmentalists these days convey the impression that climate-change research is an exceptionally dull field with little left to discover. We are assured by everyone from David Suzuki to Al Gore to Prime Minister Stephen Harper that “the science is settled.” At the recent G8 summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel even attempted to convince world leaders to play God by restricting carbon-dioxide emissions to a level that would magically limit the rise in world temperatures to 2C.

…

Climate stability has never been a feature of planet Earth. The only constant about climate is change; it changes continually and, at times, quite rapidly. Many times in the past, temperatures were far higher than today, and occasionally, temperatures were colder. As recently as 6,000 years ago, it was about 3C warmer than now. Ten thousand years ago, while the world was coming out of the thou-sand-year-long “Younger Dryas” cold episode, temperatures rose as much as 6C in a decade — 100 times faster than the past century’s 0.6C warming that has so upset environmentalists.

…

In a series of groundbreaking scientific papers starting in 2002, Veizer, Shaviv, Carslaw, and most recently Svensmark et al., have collectively demonstrated that as the output of the sun varies, and with it, our star’s protective solar wind, varying amounts of galactic cosmic rays from deep space are able to enter our solar system and penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere. These cosmic rays enhance cloud formation which, overall, has a cooling effect on the planet. When the sun’s energy output is greater, not only does the Earth warm slightly due to direct solar heating, but the stronger solar wind generated during these “high sun” periods blocks many of the cosmic rays from entering our atmosphere. Cloud cover decreases and the Earth warms still more.

The opposite occurs when the sun is less bright. More cosmic rays are able to get through to Earth’s atmosphere, more clouds form, and the planet cools more than would otherwise be the case due to direct solar effects alone. This is precisely what happened from the middle of the 17th century into the early 18th century, when the solar energy input to our atmosphere, as indicated by the number of sunspots, was at a minimum and the planet was stuck in the Little Ice Age. These new findings suggest that changes in the output of the sun caused the most recent climate change. By comparison, CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet’s climate on long, medium and even short time scales.

In some fields the science is indeed “settled.” For example, plate tectonics, once highly controversial, is now so well-established that we rarely see papers on the subject at all. But the science of global climate change is still in its infancy, with many thousands of papers published every year. In a 2003 poll conducted by German environmental researchers Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, two-thirds of more than 530 climate scientists from 27 countries surveyed did not believe that “the current state of scientific knowledge is developed well enough to allow for a reasonable assessment of the effects of greenhouse gases.” About half of those polled stated that the science of climate change was not sufficiently settled to pass the issue over to policymakers at all.

Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe solar cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth. Beginning to plan for adaptation to such a cool period, one which may continue well beyond one 11-year cycle, as did the Little Ice Age, should be a priority for governments. It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada. As a country at the northern limit to agriculture in the world, it would take very little cooling to destroy much of our food crops, while a warming would only require that we adopt farming techniques practiced to the south of us.

Meantime, we need to continue research into this, the most complex field of science ever tackled, and immediately halt wasted expenditures on the King Canute-like task of “stopping climate change.”

Indeed.  Maybe if they actually studied climate change instead of trying to prove the Global Warming myth, we might get somewhere.

 Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, A Blog For All, DeMediacratic Nation, Right Truth, Maggie’s Notebook, Jeanette’s Celebrity Corner, Shadowscope, The Pet Haven Blog, Webloggin, Cao’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Jo’s Cafe, Conservative Cat, third world county, Right Celebrity, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Nuke’s news and views, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS