Scary

In some distant future, they will look at the people of today and think we were crazy. Kind of like we do looking back at Nazi Germany or the Spanish Inquisition. Maybe this is not as bad, but the very idea of calling CO² a pollutant, when it’s a natural process, is nothing short of wacko. Yet a bunch of media whores politicians are champing at the bit to pass some laws. Laws which will cost you a lot more money.

California sued the federal government on Thursday to force a decision about whether the state can impose the nation’s first greenhouse gas emission standards for cars and light trucks.

More than a dozen other states are poised to follow California’s lead if it is granted the waiver from federal law, presenting a challenge to automakers who would have to adapt to a patchwork of regulations.

The state’s lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., was expected after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vowed last spring to take legal action.

“Our future depends on us taking action on global warming right now,” Schwarzenegger said during a news conference. “There’s no legal basis for Washington to stand in our way.”

At issue is California’s nearly two-year-old request for a waiver under the federal Clean Air Act allowing it to implement a 2002 state anti-pollution law regulating greenhouse gases.

Eleven other states have adopted California’s standard as a way to combat global warming and five others are considering it.

“Our position is that it’s time for EPA to either act or get out of the way,” said Lee Moore, a spokesman for New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram.

All of this means car prices will go up and the climate will not be affected one bit. Only you will be.

And if they succeed here, trust me (as Arnold likes to say), that’s just the beginning. They will start going after other things. And where will it end? How many more laws restricting business and people will they pass? I shudder to think.

All the caterwauling about the Patriot act is fine. But there is plenty more to be concerned with from nanny state and “green” legislation. It’s all getting out of hand. 

First, I just want to mention that this is just a n observation that I want to put down on paper and get some feedback.  I haven’t thought this through very well.

So, I am reading “The Omnivore’s Dilemma.” And it brings up a lot of great points, many of which parallel the CO2 issue.  Mainly, in describing how our agricultural food-system works, it really illustrates how industrialized humans love causing more problems for themselves simply so that some people can make money. Whereas nature, like a free market, strives for balance and diversity, humans look for efficacy, like a communist dictatorship. As a result, these systems get totally out of balance and ultimately become unsustainable.

Take beef for instance.  Just a few decades ago, the cow would eat the grass, fertilize the crops, and then be cut into beef.  It was a closed balanced system.  The crops thrived, the cows thrived (as they are one of the most efficient grass eaters on the planet), and the farmers were able to make a living. (I know, being a farmer in the early 20th century was no picnic. But lets keep it simply.) The farmers had to grow all sorts of crops to keep the land healthy, feed the cows, and make a living. Nice and balanced, with lots of diversity.

Due to billions of dollars in corn subsidies from our Government, the only way to raise beef profitably is in centralized cow farms--500-5000 cows. We now feed the most advanced grass eating creature on the planet corn, mixed with cow blood and fat. The cows grow huge, but live only half as long. Their manure, that once was great for the land, become toxic in these concentrations. Sewer systems need to be created. And farm land needs to be fertilized with chemical nitrogen because the new poop is too concentrated and too toxic. Teams of vets need to be around to keep the cows alive as this diet is not sustainable.  They keep the cows alive using drugs, antibiotics, and huge pills that keep the cows stomachs at a neutral enough level so that the acid doesn’t eat through there stomach and kill them in months.  No balance.  We are forcing everything.  The only reason that this practice is sustainable is because the corn that is fed to the cows is practically free.  Without the subsidies, this would be unsustainable.

I think our CO2 emissions is kind of a similar thing.  Releasing CO2 is natural. As is growing beef to eat. However, what was once a sustainable process of us releasing co2 with plants absorbing it to grow has lost its balance. Now like the cow, which used to fertilize our lands, and feed our bellys may become a huge liability. CO2 seems like it is following a similar path. We may need to spend trillions fixing a problem that we created. The solution to the CO2 problem is going to be so complicated and unsustainable that I cannot even fathom is being a success. And the more we meddle, the more unsustainable the problem will become.

I guess what I am saying is that industrialized-man is very short-sited. Were screwed. That, and this world needs a healthy dose of Zen-Buddhism.

Not an argument here. Just some thoughts. Take it as you will.

p.s. Omnivore Dilemma is a fantastic book. Of course the writer has some “evil big business” paranoia in him, but it does a great job explaining how we get our food and why 70% of our diet is corn.  It is really an amazing process that makes you think “how did it ever get this way?”

Posted by  on  11/09  at  07:33 AM

I understand your argument and it makes sense if we just continued on doing things this way indefinitely. However, we live in a different time than the 19th century where people just operated by the same principals they did for thousands of years. Technology keeps evolving and people shift their methods of operation.

The problem with both the CO² and cow manure arguments is that we only recently came into these methods, and new methods are already being devised to replace them.

There is already talk of using cow manure as a fuel source. Just as its used as fertilizer now (yes, much of the manure is mined for fertilizer in farms).

When humans are faced with a problem, they deal with them up to a point until they solve the problem. Rest assured at the attention brought to things like animal waste pollution is leading to scientific solutions just as many ways to reduce CO² are in the works and coming online.

In 10, 20 years many of these problems will have been solved. And that’s not really a long time in the scheme of things. Much of the hysteria were hearing now is a way to force people to move in a certain direction.

Posted by  on  11/09  at  10:51 AM

The big problem is that EVERYTHING the govt does is designed for one purpose and one purpose only - to generate money, mainly thru taxes.  I expect that some day the govt will pass legislation regulating and taxing farts.

Posted by  on  11/09  at  11:58 AM

Are you also against government regulation of waterways?  Billions of tax dollars have been used to build wastewater treatment plants since the clean water act was passed in the 1970s.  All for treating E. Coli, a naturally-occuring bacterium!  Phosphorus and nitrates are also substances wastewater plants remove, and they’re naturally occuring, too!

And the clean air act, it has cost the power generating industry billions as well to reduce the levels of sulfides in the air, which, once again, are naturally occuring.

Get the idea?  Just because it’s ‘naturally occuring’ doesn’t mean it’s not a problem when the concentrations of the substances increase beyond their normal levels.

p.s. - The “2” in CO2 should be a subscript, not a superscript.

Posted by  on  11/11  at  09:49 AM

I wasn’t talking about waterways, which is something you can point to as a real thing that affects people. Global Warming is based on a theory which is debatable, despite the attempts of some to shut down the debate.

You seem to be obsessing over that one sentence when it was really meant to be a sarcastic throw away line. The bigger picture here is what I was talking about. Politicians are using GW as an excuse for everything they do. And I see that as a dangerous trend.

It wasn’t but a few years ago they were using 9/11 as an excuse for everything they wanted to do. Understand where I am going with this now?

The post that bugged you so much because of my throw away Nazi line, was all about encroaching stateism brought on by an alleged threat. All political agendas are driven by a perceived crisis. Often they are invented or made into something bigger than they actually are. My argument about man made GW is that it is overly inflated if not entirely bogus. And its being used by some to drive certain agendas, many of which aren’t ultimately good.

Posted by  on  11/11  at  01:41 PM

In the name of 9/11, we lost the writ of habeas corpus, wasted billions on a war (not the war itself, just the mismanaged funds), increased surveillance of our own citizens, and created a toxic partisan environment.

In the name of global warming, proponents wish to increase taxes.

If you are arguing against global warming because of a perceived threat to liberty, you should pay attention to other current events.  The GOP just ruined our concept of liberty in 6 short years.  You picked the wrong battle.

Posted by  on  11/11  at  04:33 PM

All successful and powerful laws violating human rights over the last 30 years were passed by liberals.  That is the brutal truth.  You don’t think so?  Try calling a lady in your office “a babe.” Try burning a Palestinian (rather than American) flag on campus.  Try renting a meeting place for a bunch of smokers.  Try carrying a gun for your own protection.
Want to see “human rights” under liberalism?  Read about the Soviet Union.

Posted by  on  11/11  at  07:38 PM

It’s one of those things that would amuse me if wasn’t so sad. And Toren explained what I was talking about. Stateists (aka Progressives) want to the government to ban this, that, and the other thing. To regulate what people can do or say. Then they turn around and scream about the constitution and the Bush dictatorship.

Bush will be gone soon, but the laws the progressives get passed will be with us a long time and they only get worse.

The Patriot Act has a time limit on it. It has to be renewed.

You don’t see any of that with the lefty laws. Nope.

Posted by  on  11/11  at  08:23 PM

Try calling a lady in your office “a babe.” <I>

Go right ahead, Lumpy.  She still won’t go out with you

<i>Try burning a Palestinian (rather than American) flag on campus.

Campus, shmampus.  Burn it in your front yard like a true patriot.  Bonus points if you do it in front of an Israeli embassy

Try renting a meeting place for a bunch of smokers. 

Damned liberals!  Actually, it’s called a bar with an outdoor patio, but goddamn those liberals!

Try carrying a gun for your own protection.

You can do that too, no one is stopping you.  However, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, then there might be a problem.

Damned liberals!

Posted by  on  11/12  at  01:12 PM

Steve,

Try being funny.

Posted by  on  11/12  at  01:51 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages

<< Back to main