by Allan Taylor

Created on: May 16, 2008   Last Updated: November 26, 2010

This title is an example of the public confusion that exists with the term "global warming" or the now preferred "climate change" and associated hysteria that exists in Australia and around the world.

Semantic manipulation is a forte of the climate change alarmists. Climate change can now mean both global warming and cooling! No wonder the politicians, including new Australian PM Kevin Rudd, get confused.

Government subsidy for some supposed beneficial activity can be a good thing if you get your facts right. Climate change policy requires good science and good economics neither of which are obvious with the Rudd government, nor with the previous Howard government.

Firstly, it is necessary to define what you are talking about. What do we mean by pollution and polluters? A rather vital consideration!

A broad definition of "pollution" is anything unwanted or found in the environment that is, or could be harmful, or undesirable to the welfare of mankind. So pollution is by definition a bad thing and should be eliminated as much as possible. It follows that the Government should stop subsidizing polluters.

With regard to climate change policy have the politicians asked the plants whether CO2 is a pollutant? I think not. Carbon dioxide, like oxygen, is an essential life giving gas. We live on oxygen and the plants live on carbon dioxide. Currently the atmosphere contains on average about 385 ppm CO2 and seems to be increasing very slowing, a few ppm each decade. Our burning of fossil fuels and other industrial activity do contribute to this as do many natural activities, such as volcanic eruptions and outgasing of the oceans. Our contribution is minor and nothing to worry about.

Higher CO2 content of the atmosphere is beneficial to plant life as it improves growth rates, which is desirable for crops and tree plantations. About 1000 ppm is a favorable level used in some hot houses in horticulture but I doubt whether the earth's atmosphere would ever (again) get to that level, unless there were world wide catastrophic volcanic eruptions as has happened in the geological past.

The idea that higher CO2 levels cause global warming is now debunked by the progress of science. There has been no observable global warming for a decade even with a measured rise in CO2 level. Concern is now being directed to the possibility of entering a prolonged cool period, similar to that experienced during the Little Ice Age (14th to 19th centuries). In summary, atmospheric CO2 gas is

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>