They Have Known For Some Time

With Jimmy Carter's passing much praise has been heaped on his legacy. Much well deserved. One item of note is his elevation to the status of "climate warrior" because he had solar panels installed on the White House. Which he did. He also championed (beltway-speak for "spent money on") solar energy research, with quite a few GT-EES researchers on the job market when Reagan took office. But was he really a climate warrior? Did he know something? Yes he did. But so did most of his predecessors and all who came after. How did this happen?

A good place to start is around 200 years ago. That's right, the 1820's. This is when Fourier, better known for his transform, theorized about a process we now call the greenhouse effect. This became more concrete in the 1850's when a scientist determined, empirically, that CO2 and moisture had just the heat retention effect that Fourier predicted. These results were presented in the U.S., but roundly ignored in Europe. This particular scientist had three crippling qualities: she was female; she was an amateur; and she was American. Not until several years later, when her results were reproduced by a European male did this become generally accepted. So, before the United States was 100 years old. 

To be fair, at this point in time, most inquiry regarded where we were in the current Ice Age and where that was headed. Yes, we are still in an Ice Age. This was Tyndall's line of investigation in 1859 with a focus on identifying the specific gases involved in atmospheric heat retention. This was after Foote's work and she was never credited and yet he identified the same gas as she. In 1896, Arrhenius, a Swede, create the first of what we would now call a "climate model," which estimated our current global temperature rise with frightening accuracy. 

So. For well over 125 years we've known. Well, at least the best and brightest have. You know, like our scientists and world leaders. Creme de la creme. Teddy Roosevelt knew. So did Franklin. And Churchill. And Kennedy, who preferred a man on the moon over a stable climate. And Johnson. And Reagan. Eisenhower. Obama. Yes, even Jimmy Carter. They all knew. They all had other things on their to-do lists. 

Was there anything they could do? No, there really wasn't. So, has there really been a climate crisis? Not according to Mirriam-Webster, who defines a crisis  as an inflection point, where some action, some change is imminent. Things are indeed happening, but immediacy is not part of the conversation. Probably because there isn't much we can, and even less that we will, do. Not anything that will make a significant impact. Now that the issue has become a political bludgeon all that will happen is folks will beat their opponents over the head while spouting copious hot air. 

Now we all know.

Remember The 1970's?

Many don't, maybe most. It was when Sally Struthers was selling poverty and sympathy and we were constantly told about all the folks starving in America (by which they meant the U.S.A). Turns out much of that wasn't true and as the truth leaked out, folks might not be getting three squares but they weren't dying of starvation, the message changed to "food insecurity" where it has remained, though the meaning has become malleable. Malleability was key because as greater truths appeared the meaning was modified to suit the agenda and its narrative. Easy Peasy.

The 1970's were also the time of climate alarmists who were able to commandeer headlines and front pages of major magazines. With that much runway, and cautioning from experts who at that time were respected, one might think something would have been done. You might even point to CFC bans and reduction of the ozone holes. But the real problem is that these alarmists were warning of a coming ice age. This is despite the fact that other experts correctly pointed out that we were still in the current ice age. And it was coming to a close. Since then there has been a "expert 180". A pivot to global warming. After a few harsh winters where folks were freezing their collective arses off and paying mightily on global warming causing fossil fuels to boot, the "message" got lost. So we got an upgrade to climate change. This predated full control of media channels so legitimate voices pointed out that the climate has always been changing and would continue to do so. This forced a side step to climate change caused by human activity. 

And that is where we are today. 

The problem is that almost no one wants to do anything about it even though the answer is pretty obvious: reduce human activity. And the easiest way to do that is even more obvious.

How Is Your Carbon Footprint?

It's your nasty ole carbon footprint that causes Climate Change by creating what they call Greenhouse Gases. You're killing polar bears. Cute. Cuddly. Polar bears.

You may not know it but a lot of folks spend real emotional energy fretting about their carbon footprint. It should be noted that most do not self-identify as Republicans. To be fair the issue has been amped up by those that have made a business of it (if one considers NGOs and other not-for-profits as the businesses they really are). So we have the LEED bingo system complete with heavy metal certifications. We have Birkenstock babes pedaling around town and when they have to drive they're puttin' the pedal to the metal in a Leaf or the now-not-so-trendy Prius. They drift off to sleep with visions of solar panels and windmills dancing in their heads.

Lots of room there. Not a whole lot of intellect has been wasted on this Climate Change, formerly known as the Global Warming thingy. The problem with the carbon footprint approach is that it focuses on the wrong cause, notably carbon dioxide and the processes that produce it. Like filthy coal-fired power plants, cars and trucks just belchin' tons of the stuff and even Big-Ole-Jet-Airliners. We're practically drowning in See-Oh-Two.

Turns out there is more than one greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide is far from the worst offender. That title goes to methane. That's the stuff that DeKalb County is capturing from landfills and using to power vehicles. And methane does more damage to our climate than greenhouse gases from all forms of transportation combined.

The aforementioned NGO/NonProfits all profit from growth by which they mean revenue growth--donations. Now what if organizations representing the industry emitting enormous amounts of methane donated money to Green Peace, the Sierra Club and other loud mouth organizations pretending to act in the public's interest? What would you think? Well, given we don't hear a peep out of these groups regarding this imminent danger most folks would call it hush money.

Who is this powerful, shadowing group? Is it the Koch brothers? Surely the NRA has something to do with it. Sadly, no, as these groups are much easier to deal with. The real culprit is Big Farmer. You know, those mythical, hardworking underpaid folks that feed the planet, all the while conjuring images of American Gothic.  And they are powerful enough to own Washington, own the media and own these NonProfits. Their larcenous farm subsidies serve as enduring tribute to that power. And after the Patriot Act were Oprah to say what she said on her show she would probably face criminal charges. They are that powerful.  And oh, soooo patriotic.

Methane, and a lot of it that is released into our environment, is what comes out of the front end of ruminants, particularly cattle. It's What's For Dinner is not only a major cause of Climate Change, it is growing. It is also incredibly inefficient at converting vegetable nutrients to Large Dead Quadruped, it consumes enormous amounts of water and leaves a very healthy share of polluted water and land. Industrial "farming" of animal protein is a very wasteful business unless you're just counting your government subsidized profits.

But we just cannot get enough. Federal land is not only grazed at 18th century prices, the BLM is sending out choppers with snipers to take out indigenous predators. You really are killing cute native wolves. While timber is taken during deforestation in Brazil, trees (which we in daVille know are renewable resources) are not replanted, instead the land is turned over to cattle operations for grazing. Some might disagree over which is product and which is byproduct but at least one NonProfit representative had the courage to acknowledge that animal agriculture was the primary driver of deforestation but also noted that many remain silent because no one wants to be the next Dorothy Stang who is widely believed to have been assassinated because of her fight against deforestation and its causes.

There are some things that can be done though probably not by our current crop of bought and paid for politicians. We could force the animal agriculture industry to internalize all costs--the public needs to know what they're really paying. No more free or near free grazing. No subsidized grain making its way into feedstock. Use the water, return the water. As clean water. And when lagoons of animal waste are created it must be treated.

Pay the price, charge the price.

Then the slogan will be: Beef! It's a sometimes food! and we will have made a larger impact on Climate Change than any carbon tax ever will.