Posts Tagged ‘Carbon’

Earth Day or Earth Doom?

April 22, 2016

Earth Day is an old United States invention. But talking the talk is all too often a vaccination against walking the walk. A few countries are leading the charge towards doom and gloom. And foremost that great leader of all, the USA.

As I have explained, disaster have been most profitable to Anglo-Saxon America’s expansion, traditions, and institutions… But for the Civil War. Thus there is an US tradition of benign neglect towards the worst, until it becomes juicy enough to bear fruit.

PPP A Few Countries Are The Main CO2 Culprits, And It Does Not Have To Do With Development.

Hillary Clinton feels the USA cannot afford health care. And it’s just one more step to inform us that the USA cannot inform us to cut down on CO2 emissions. Actually super young, super cool, super hip, super elected Justin Trudeau just informed us of that about Canada. It reminds me of people who say: ‘I am not a racist, BUT…’

So Trudeau agrees the Earth is scorched by carbon, but does not want to tax carbon, lest carbon would lead an unhappy life…

Pic Vignemale, With One Of the last Dying Glaciers of Pyrénées At the Foot of the Granite Pillar.

Pic Vignemale, With One Of the last Dying Glaciers of Pyrénées At the Foot of the Granite Pillar.

In the Middle Ages, it was claimed that the lioness gave birth, with her mouth. 14 centuries earlier, there were European lions in Greece. Facts get easily replace by ridiculous myths. The very large European lion had no mane. It is now extinct. Officially due to its obvious similarity with the Devil (Pluto, Hades): tall, hairy, with claws and large teeth, the European Brown Bear (ancestor to the American Grizzly) was ordered more or less exterminated by Charlemagne’s government. It nearly disappeared too.

I was talking with an American friend. She and her two children are going to the Alps this summer. Curiously she plans then to train to another mountain range, and visit it. I observed that said range, lower than the Alps, and less sharp, yet full of lakes, and granite reminded me of the Sierra Nevada, so I would never need to go there, as I frequent the Sierra all too much. She suspiciously wondered how I could know the Pyrénées, as I had never been there and gloated I never will.

Well, I use advanced morality, and various methods of tele-vision. It’s not just as good, it’s better. Knowing that the Pyrenees is a formidable, mostly impassable (very few passes) rampart between Spain and France, explains a lot. But that’s better explored through books, as, doing it by foot would take much of a lifetime.

Travelling is good. But having a human reason for it, better. If it’s just for marking territory, one stoops to the level of dogs, considering what is going on with our planet-wide mismanagement.

171 countries signed the Paris COP 21 accord in New York at the United Nations. It’s going to take one or two more years to ratify this Paris COP 21. Unfortunately, it’s supposed to be implemented in 2020… when every month now counts! There were eleven (11) straight months of worldwide temperature records.

Things need to change faster. French justice seized the belongings of the Bongo family. Bongo is one of the many African presidential families which has milked Africa. A relative of dictator Assad of Syria owns hundreds of millions of dollars of property in France alone. If one stripped all the world plutocrats of the properties they own in the leading cities and places of the West, real estate would not doubt significantly go down in value.

Meanwhile a drugged out “Jehovah Witness” musician died at 57. A few days ago, a plane had to make an emergency landing because said drugged out anti-role model had overdosed. Well I am witness that Jehovah had a very Dark Side we arguably would have done better without. And I don’t like Purple Rain very much.

Those who drug themselves out are basically saying that reality is better left alone, thus, if not most satisfying, at least, satisfying enough.

In 20 years, if one persisted at the present rate of CO2 emissions, Earth’s overall temperature would not stay below a two degree Centigrade increase. That would mean the poles would melt. Empirically the rise of temperatures of the poles has been at least five times that of the rest of the planet. That rate will itself augment considerably. Ice will run out of planet (so will many species).

The public does not seem to appreciate that a 40 a 70% reduction in CO2 before 2050 enormous effort. An example is my friend above, who has travelled over much of the world. Air travel contributes significantly to CO2 emissions. Yes, Airbus works on large electric planes. Slap a carbon tax, to accelerate its work.

COP21 says: no more net emissions CO2 in second half century. This will be very difficult to achieve without thermonuclear plants (which are still the energy of the future).

The world Public does not understand magnitude of change. One has to change not just development mode, to get rid of Carbon burning, but the very nature of everyday morality. The CO2 gets in the atmosphere, and the ocean, and the warming and acidity occur decades later. Skepticism is natural in scientists. One can only be skeptical when one sees the entire Coral Reef Barrier blanching under our eyes.

Because, ladies and gentlemen, within existing technology, the only fix is to stop burning carbon. Thermonuclear Terraforming plants will have to extract CO2 from the atmosphere, to prevent a runaway Jurassic, but those admirable devices are not yet here.Giant solar plants in the most favorable places may be able to extract CO2 too, with existing technology, including imitating plants to make useful materials from CO2.

But the fact remains: the “Energetic Transition”, away from carbon burning, is also a moral transition.

Patrice Ayme’

Extinguishing The Carbonivores: Profitable.

September 25, 2009



American politicians often talk as if it were the essence of the USA to anchor the entire value system on profitability, something defined by Wall Street according to bonus. Taking into consideration the irresistibly rising seas, it may be timely to modify this fundament of the American Way Of Life.

Paul Krugman points out in “It’s Easy Being Green” (NYT, September 25, 2009) that “saving the planet won’t come free (although the early stages of conservation actually might). But it won’t cost all that much either.”

France emit less than one third of CO2 per unit of GDP that the USA require. That restraint on the spewing of carbon allows the French to live better.

Spewing carbon requires energy, literally, and rewards people with time spent in traffic jams, and other wasteful activities, plus higher rates of all sorts of debilitating and ultimately lethal diseases. While, on the bright side, one gets to make war in Afghanistan for a crucial pipeline, which will allow to spew even more carbon found deep underground in Central Asia.

The logic of mixing carbon and happiness needs to be carefully re-examined. Indeed, casual observation shows that the French, with first class basically free health care, a pretty good free educational system whose grandes ecoles compete in the technological know how they provide, with the best anywhere, plenty of interesting things to do during their extensive vacations, an excellent retirement system completely protected by law, and a country which is both high tech, a museum, and the most visited in the world, for obvious esthetic reasons, would not exchange their way of life with the increasingly declining and pathetic American one, steadily devoured by Wall Street’s profit-above-all morality.

In France, gasoline is about eight dollars a gallon. This is mostly tax: the intrinsic cost of oil is not any higher than in the USA, since it is shipped from relatively shorter distances. Still one can observe French youth going up mountains in powerful motorbikes on single track paths (although it’s forbidden). Conclusion: the price of gas is still too low in France. And indeed, serious studies have shown that individual consummation still augmented, in the last year, even after the French government’s last hike in fuel taxes.

France will implement a carbon tax in January 2010 (the price of carbon will be 17 Euros per ton, 20% above the free market, with the idea of rising it by 100% soon). The French carbon tax is the fruit of a political consensus, taken by all candidates before the last presidential election. In France the increasing consensus is that IT’S PROFITABLE BEING GREEN. This is also more or less the official line in Germany, and the new line in China.

France has forced that, by law, the carbon emissions from cars are always lower in the European Union (and China, among others, is now carbon copying the French/European strategy, from high taxes on gasoline, to the exact same CO2 tailpipe exhaust enforced in the EU).

It is now agreed that the soon to be implemented latest CO2 emissions from cars in the European Union will be a third of the ones in the USA (right now, they are half).

It’s no accident that the French car companies have the lowest fleet CO2 emissions, worldwide: it’s profitable to produce efficient cars. No accident, either, that BMW and Mercedes are on the ropes (and BMW is allying itself with Peugeot, developing new engines with the French firm’s know how; Peugeot SA being not only the world’s most efficient car company, but also just the double winner of the 24 hours of Le Mans with two turbo diesel cars…)

The CARBONIVOROUS class is not interested to pay for the mess it leaves behind, and all the lives it destroys: if it did, carbon could not compete, it would be too expensive (except for aircraft fuel, since algae fuel has not been massively developed and deployed yet; astonishingly, algae are such that they have a negative CO2 contribution).

Using carbon when not necessary, does not just threaten the climate, but everybody’s health: applying to carbon the same criterions of safety that are applied in the nuclear industry would be immensely costly for the carbon industry, it would be unable to compete with renewables, and nuclear. Civilian nuclear energy killed many only in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster (which was easy to avoid, and would not have occurred, if only the insanely conceived reactor, of a type that ought not to exist, had been surrounded by a containment building of Western mandatory standards: the explosion would have stayed inside!)

Carbon energy, even when neglecting the effect on climate, even when restricted to Europe and America, kills orders of magnitude more people, year after year, than Chernobyl did (at least several hundred thousands are killed by carbon, each year, and a few hundreds, once, at Chernobyl, an accident that had more to do with Stalinist methods than anything else).

Carbon burning consists into exploding in the air 400 million years of buried geology in a few decades: it is a truly absurd form of geoengineering. It has no future. So the CARBONIVORES will fight to death: after all, they fight to prevent their own extinction.

Patrice Ayme


P/S: So the argument above was that saving carbon saves health, lives, and energy. For the former, life, it may not be a coincidence that the French average hospitalization rate is 40% of the one in Manhattan. (So Manhattanites get hospitalized 2.5 times more.)Although cars are less used in Manhattan than in the rest of the USA, the life style in Manhattan is clearly unhealthy and unsuitable by French standards: as a lot of Wall Street money escapes to Connecticut, not enough is left to insure French standards of health and comfort, in Manhattan itself. Wasting carbon encourages wasting standards of living all over.