Climate Change / Carbon Credits - Hold onto Your Wallets!
“Global Warming” or “Climate Change” as its called now since the globe hasn’t warmed in more than 10 years now is being set up as a massive global tax on every productive member of society The fact that the globe isn’t warming still hasn’t changed the minds of the politicians who want to play on the science illiteracy of the general public. So they have figured out a way to tax every man, woman, and child for something that isn’t necessary except to maintain their own political power over the rest of us. Thus is invented the “carbon footprint.” The idea of a “carbon footprint” is perhaps political correctness taken to its most absurd extreme.
The carbon cycle is defined by “Wikipedia” as a biogeochemical cycle by which carbon is exchanged among the atmosphere, pedosphere, geosphere, hydrosphere, and the atmosphere of the earth. This cycle has been going on for as long as the earth has existed. It began before mankind walked the planet and will continue well beyond our existence here. All forms of life on this planet are carbon based. Plants, animals, insects, creatures in the sea are all made of long chain carbon molecules.
It is largely plant life that has formed the massive coal and petroleum reserves we are utilizing today for fuel. As these products are being oxidized (burned), carbon is being released back into the environment.
On one hand, those who advocate the burning of forestland with prescribed burns call what they do as “carbon neutral” because all they are doing is releasing sequestered carbon. The increase of plant growth – both the trees and the understory- are supposed to take in the carbon dioxide being released by burning and “re-sequester” the carbon.
Following this logic, we are already doing that with our carbon-based fuels. It takes energy to produce a car, a house, a building, or a highway. Carbon is used in its many forms to produce these commodities. Arguably, these new ‘forms” of carbon are sequestering carbon better than one could ever hope to do with a forest of trees.
Look around and see what you can find that isn’t some form of carbon. I have played this game with several folks from time to time and they haven’t stopped to realize how much carbon is all around us everyday. The streets we drive on are asphalt – a long chain carbon molecule mixed with crushed limestone (calcium carbonate.) The plastics virtually everywhere are long chain carbon molecules. The steel in our cars, building, metal signs, etc. are iron and carbon. The paint on the cars, roadways, signs, houses, etc. are all carbon-based molecules. You can go on and on and will be hard pressed to find something that doesn’t have some form of carbon in it – from the sheet rock in the wall to the concrete in the curb – to all things living or dead – they all have carbon as one of their elements.
When playing this game, it’s hard to spot something that isn’t carbon based in some way or another. Someone will point to the windshield of the truck, but then I point out that the safety glass has a thin layer of plastic sandwiched between the glass. Base metals such as copper or aluminum are some of the few things in our world that do not contain carbon but carbon was required to develop them into useful items.
The “carbon footprint” guilt trip is laid on most heavily by those most likely to make money – and a lot of it – with something called “carbon credits.” When you hear this term, hold onto your wallet, for someone somewhere is going to figure out a way to relieve you of some of your hard earned dollars (made with cellulose by the way – a long chain carbon molecule.)
Politicians have been swayed into thinking that this is a good way to raise tax revenues and the first plan was called “Cap and Trade.” (Today, it is being called “The Climate Bill” – as if anything we can do will actually change the climate.) The original idea is that the person who can sequester carbon would trade his “carbon credits” to someone who, by necessity, had to produce carbon dioxide as part of their business. This would pay the person sequestering carbon while permitting the creator of carbon dioxide to go about their business as usual while paying a “tax.” The middleman – the broker of carbon credits – reaps the rewards and nothing is actually accomplished in the form of carbon sequestration.
The carbon credit-trading scheme is about as convoluted a process as one might ever expect to find. One of the first originated in Chicago – called the Chicago Climate Exchange. You can go on their website if you think you’d like to delve further into this morass of bad science. The complexities of carbon credit trading make the IRS forms look easy by comparison.
Meanwhile, the environmentalists are pushing the planting of trees to save the planet. Trees are well known carbon sinks and yes, they are a good method of sequestering carbon. Any tree person knows that and it is in our best interest to plant more trees, right? Well, maybe. I realize its heresy to bring this to your attention, but trees are not the most efficient methods of sequestering carbon. A healthy tree can sequester 13 pounds of carbon per year. Assuming 400 trees per acre (roughly a 10 foot x 10 foot plot per tree – that’s a lot of trees per acre), a total of 2.6 tons of carbon can be sequestered per year. (See http://www.coloradotrees.org/benefits.htm#carbon) With each tree occupying a small space, can they actually grow efficiently? In addition, where will this land come from to plant all of these trees?
Now the real kicker is that grass – i.e. pasture or prairie – can sequester 34 tons of carbon per acre. Even more if it is fertilized – as much as 47 tons per acre in a field of fertilized alfalfa. End result? An acre of grass is 13 to 18 times more efficient at carbon sequestration as an acre of trees. (Those who love the sport of golf now have a new argument in the favor of more golf courses.(http://mbforagecouncil.mb.ca/CustomBlox/Files/Live/Blox/859/Carbon_Sequestration_in_Pastures_FINAL_June_26_P.pdf)
I look out in the pasture and see cattle grazing. These carbon-based life forms are taking cellulose (carbon molecules) and turning them into proteins (also long chain carbon molecules). I will be doing my part as I enjoy a grilled (with carbon fuel) steak to complete the carbon cycle.
For now, I don’t think I’ll worry about sequestering carbon. The grass is cycled back to the soil in the form of manure – a similarity closely akin to the carbon credit schemes dreamed up by politicians. If they really wanted to sequester carbon, they would make more plastic. It’s said that the plastic water bottle takes a thousand years (or more) to return to the earth. How many trees do you know that can last a thousand years?
The carbon cycle is defined by “Wikipedia” as a biogeochemical cycle by which carbon is exchanged among the atmosphere, pedosphere, geosphere, hydrosphere, and the atmosphere of the earth. This cycle has been going on for as long as the earth has existed. It began before mankind walked the planet and will continue well beyond our existence here. All forms of life on this planet are carbon based. Plants, animals, insects, creatures in the sea are all made of long chain carbon molecules.
It is largely plant life that has formed the massive coal and petroleum reserves we are utilizing today for fuel. As these products are being oxidized (burned), carbon is being released back into the environment.
On one hand, those who advocate the burning of forestland with prescribed burns call what they do as “carbon neutral” because all they are doing is releasing sequestered carbon. The increase of plant growth – both the trees and the understory- are supposed to take in the carbon dioxide being released by burning and “re-sequester” the carbon.
Following this logic, we are already doing that with our carbon-based fuels. It takes energy to produce a car, a house, a building, or a highway. Carbon is used in its many forms to produce these commodities. Arguably, these new ‘forms” of carbon are sequestering carbon better than one could ever hope to do with a forest of trees.
Look around and see what you can find that isn’t some form of carbon. I have played this game with several folks from time to time and they haven’t stopped to realize how much carbon is all around us everyday. The streets we drive on are asphalt – a long chain carbon molecule mixed with crushed limestone (calcium carbonate.) The plastics virtually everywhere are long chain carbon molecules. The steel in our cars, building, metal signs, etc. are iron and carbon. The paint on the cars, roadways, signs, houses, etc. are all carbon-based molecules. You can go on and on and will be hard pressed to find something that doesn’t have some form of carbon in it – from the sheet rock in the wall to the concrete in the curb – to all things living or dead – they all have carbon as one of their elements.
When playing this game, it’s hard to spot something that isn’t carbon based in some way or another. Someone will point to the windshield of the truck, but then I point out that the safety glass has a thin layer of plastic sandwiched between the glass. Base metals such as copper or aluminum are some of the few things in our world that do not contain carbon but carbon was required to develop them into useful items.
The “carbon footprint” guilt trip is laid on most heavily by those most likely to make money – and a lot of it – with something called “carbon credits.” When you hear this term, hold onto your wallet, for someone somewhere is going to figure out a way to relieve you of some of your hard earned dollars (made with cellulose by the way – a long chain carbon molecule.)
Politicians have been swayed into thinking that this is a good way to raise tax revenues and the first plan was called “Cap and Trade.” (Today, it is being called “The Climate Bill” – as if anything we can do will actually change the climate.) The original idea is that the person who can sequester carbon would trade his “carbon credits” to someone who, by necessity, had to produce carbon dioxide as part of their business. This would pay the person sequestering carbon while permitting the creator of carbon dioxide to go about their business as usual while paying a “tax.” The middleman – the broker of carbon credits – reaps the rewards and nothing is actually accomplished in the form of carbon sequestration.
The carbon credit-trading scheme is about as convoluted a process as one might ever expect to find. One of the first originated in Chicago – called the Chicago Climate Exchange. You can go on their website if you think you’d like to delve further into this morass of bad science. The complexities of carbon credit trading make the IRS forms look easy by comparison.
Meanwhile, the environmentalists are pushing the planting of trees to save the planet. Trees are well known carbon sinks and yes, they are a good method of sequestering carbon. Any tree person knows that and it is in our best interest to plant more trees, right? Well, maybe. I realize its heresy to bring this to your attention, but trees are not the most efficient methods of sequestering carbon. A healthy tree can sequester 13 pounds of carbon per year. Assuming 400 trees per acre (roughly a 10 foot x 10 foot plot per tree – that’s a lot of trees per acre), a total of 2.6 tons of carbon can be sequestered per year. (See http://www.coloradotrees.org/benefits.htm#carbon) With each tree occupying a small space, can they actually grow efficiently? In addition, where will this land come from to plant all of these trees?
Now the real kicker is that grass – i.e. pasture or prairie – can sequester 34 tons of carbon per acre. Even more if it is fertilized – as much as 47 tons per acre in a field of fertilized alfalfa. End result? An acre of grass is 13 to 18 times more efficient at carbon sequestration as an acre of trees. (Those who love the sport of golf now have a new argument in the favor of more golf courses.(http://mbforagecouncil.mb.ca/CustomBlox/Files/Live/Blox/859/Carbon_Sequestration_in_Pastures_FINAL_June_26_P.pdf)
I look out in the pasture and see cattle grazing. These carbon-based life forms are taking cellulose (carbon molecules) and turning them into proteins (also long chain carbon molecules). I will be doing my part as I enjoy a grilled (with carbon fuel) steak to complete the carbon cycle.
For now, I don’t think I’ll worry about sequestering carbon. The grass is cycled back to the soil in the form of manure – a similarity closely akin to the carbon credit schemes dreamed up by politicians. If they really wanted to sequester carbon, they would make more plastic. It’s said that the plastic water bottle takes a thousand years (or more) to return to the earth. How many trees do you know that can last a thousand years?
Source...