Going green but easy on the carbon
The Mail has launched its Go Green campaign this week and I must admit I feel a bit like Galileo and his followers back in the 1600s being branded heretics because they tried to tell people the earth was not the centre of the universe as the popular bandwagon of the day claimed.
Don't get me wrong I am not against going green and treating the earth with a little respect. That has been my philosophy all the time that Governments allowed raw sewage to be dumped in the seas, or allowed our rivers to become so polluted the only life they supported was bacteria that lived on the dead and a whole host of other acts of corporate and state vandalism.
The problem is that I don't subscribe to the current global warming bandwagon although I will admit as bandwagons go it has a very small carbon footprint, being driven as it is by smoke and mirrors. Some of the dodgy science backing up even dodgier claims would struggle to get a GCSE in even our Play School level exam system.
I just get the feeling that the pseudo science behind all this is about the same as waking up one morning and finding it is raining and a group of scientists then claiming that if it is the same for the next 40 days and nights then the earth will flood so give them wheelbarrows awash with readies and they will tell you how much it will flood, design an ark, create flood defences and then explain in detail, for a further sum, why the sun came out after three days and we are safe after all until the next time it rains.
Governments lap it up because it is yet another inventive way to raise taxes and takes bureaucracy into Alice in Wonderland territory while industry is happily trading in carbon futures and a whole raft of new companies and consultancies are being set up to estimate, manage, reduce, monitor of whatever else can be thought of to do with carbon footprints. Then there is bio-fuel which, as cons go, rates with the South Sea bubble. That nice little earner is managing to push up food prices, add to starvation and destroy rain forests all at the fill of a petrol tank.
I can't help but think though, that in 50, or 100, or 200 or 1,000 years or whatever the earth will be warmer or colder whatever we happen to do. I supect we make about the same difference as a raindrop in the Pacific but there you go.
But back to Go Green. Not subscribing to the dodgy theories on global warming is not to say that all is well in the world. We do need alternative sources of energy or one day our world will just stop; we do need to recycle more and throw away less and we need to cut down on energy use by, for example, buying locally produced products in season rather than strawberries in February flown halfway around the globe and we need to get back into some sort of balance with nature.
If you think about it every other creature on earth from bacteria and worms to lions and whales live in some sort of balance. They have a purpose in the great scheme of things to justify their existence. The odd creature out is man. We are out of balance with everything else on the earth. As for our purpose . . . you tell me.
(2) comments so far add yours here
Share:
Older/Newer
« Buttie - the Campaign for Real Bacon | Ten green bottles, four cans and a baked bean tin »
2 Comments
Leave a comment
Keep up to date
Technorati
Authors
Roger Clarke
Birmingham’s very own Grumpy Old Man on what gets right up his nose.
I think going green is something that everyone can agree is a step in the right direction toward building a better community, and laying down the foundations for which future generations can successfully thrive in a healthier environment. Plus, I think many businesses will benefit from going green, not only building a more acceptable public persona, but in the long run it really helps companies save money and be a positive contributor to the world we live in.
Another thing I want to talk about is bioheat, it’s just one small measure that people can take in order to start living a greener lifestyle.
Has anyone ever heard of it, or has switched to it? I want to start taking initiative in turning my home into a greener household, one way I have started is by switching out all my lightbulbs in my home to energy efficient lightbulbs. And I am also seriously considering switching over to bioheat as an alternative to regular oilheat. The thing that I love the most about it is that it’s completely clean burning, and is comprised of a b5 blend of oils which are derived from natural plant and vegetable sustainable resources such as corn, hemp, and avocados just to name a few. If you all want more information on how bioheat, just go on to http://oilheatamerica.com/index.mv?screen=bioheat I work with NORA to bring this info to you all!
Bioheating is a viable alternative to oil fired heating and a useful way of recycyling all the grease and fat from chippies, canteens, restaurants and burger bars but let's not get carried away and start growing crops just to produce biodiesel or we will just make the current bio fuel fiasco even worse.
Sadly the problem with the econistas, as with any zealots, is they have a blinkered view of just their world and their objectives and think consequences are something to do with a Victorian parlour game.
Thus we have the ongoing destruction of vast tracts of Amazonian rain forest, which are excellent at absorbing carbon dioxide, to grow soya, a crop which does little for CO2. The soya is then shipped thousands of miles to the USA where soya production is being given over to crops for bio fuels and the fuel, i turn, is then shipped to the UK and Europe where, with a double subsidy, producers can undercut European suppliers and make a handsome profit.
Food prices are thus linked to oil prices and with production of bio fuels increasing, aided by subsidy, less crops are grown for food which reduces supply, increases demand and by simple economics increases price. The result is higher food prices for everyone from Sutton Coldfield to Somalia and increasing starvation.
I suppose somebody must have thought it was a pretty good plan.