Is carbon dioxide — two pounds of which each of us exhales daily — a pollutant? And are catastrophes increasing as a result of higher concentrations of the gas? Physics — along with a few other branches of science — says no.
Nonetheless, in a landmark 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the EPA concluded that it has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases, setting off a cascade of regulatory actions that target fossil fuels as emitters of a dangerous gas and promoting “green” energy as the solution. This ruling has become known as the “Endangerment Finding” and it determined that carbon dioxide was a “pollutant” that was dangerously warming the atmosphere and oceans, leading to climate catastrophe.
Now, the current Supreme Court is set to review the 15-year-old finding Feb. 28. Never mind that, according to Clean Air Act co-author John Dingell, Congress never intended for EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.
Setting aside legalistic arguments as to whether Congress or the EPA has the authority to make such decisions, the science is clear: Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will not lead to the catastrophic consequences that the global warming enthusiasts predict. In fact, a recent Louisiana judge dictated that the EPA needs to use realistic metrics when evaluating the costs or benefits of more CO2. Using a higher, real-world discount rate mandated by Congress reveals that the “social cost of carbon” from increasing carbon dioxide emissions is a net benefit to society. That is correct. More CO2 benefits society and the peoples of the Earth.
The Earth’s atmosphere has warmed about one degree Celsius since 1850, and CO2 has increased approximately 130 parts-per-million since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to about 415 ppm today This combination of modest warming and a rise in atmospheric CO2 has provided a huge benefit to the Earth’s ecosystems and to humanity.
Contrary to predictions of ever-increasing catastrophes and harm to humanity, quite the opposite is occurring. By virtually every metric the planet’s ecosystems are improving and we are enjoying those benefits.
Deserts are shrinking, the bulk of the planet is enjoying re-forestation not de-forestation, vegetation is exploding across all ecological niches, natural disasters have been in a twenty-year decline, hurricanes are not increasing, the strongest tornadoes are in decline, and our air and water are cleaner today than in modern history. The majority of North American heat records were set 90 to 100 years ago. Where is the crisis? There is none.
That more carbon dioxide is fueling plant growth is accepted as fact by all parties in the climate debate (and yes, Virginia, there IS a debate). Modest warming is providing longer growing seasons in temperate climes, assisting in the cultivation and harvesting of more food. That increase in crop growth is turbocharged by the CO2 fertilization effect. With carbon dioxide increasing in recent decades, there have been significant improvements in crop harvests and an overall greening of Earth. Greenhouses add carbon dioxide to enhance production.
It is accepted by experts on both sides of the issue that carbon dioxide retains small amounts of solar radiation — heat — that otherwise would escape into outer space. Proponents of catastrophic man-made warming exaggerate this phenomenon, using unlikely and unsupportable high-end projections of the warming effect to achieve extreme heat scenarios of the future.
Whatever the cause of the temperature increases of the last 300 years, there is no need to fear carbon dioxide’s future greenhouse effect because the gas at the current concentration of approximately 400 parts per million has nearly reached its peak potency. Even if the gas were to double, the effect would be a mere one degree Celsius of warming— hardly an emergency.
A ruling by the Supreme Court to roll back the Endangerment Finding would simply be a ruling that “follows the science” and recognizes the important contributions that more CO2 is having on the planet’s health and to the human condition.
Gregory Wrightstone is executive director of the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va., an organization of more than 80 scientists and researchers.
© Copyright 2022 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.
—-
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.
“Is carbon dioxide — two pounds of which each of us exhales daily — a pollutant? And are catastrophes increasing as a result of higher concentrations of the gas? Physics — along with a few other branches of science — says no.”
The real pollutant is the propaganda spewed out by the climate cultists. They are constantly changing their story—their predictions—their “science”—their “supporting facts”. It is all a bunch of misinformation and lies—and they know it.
Carbon is the most important element of life. Yes indeed, humans are carbon-based lifeforms. About 18% mass composition of the human body is composed of carbon. Oxygen is the most abundant element in the human body with about 65% mass. They are the basic unit for our organic molecules, that is unless you are an American Democrat whose spines are made of Petroleum Jelly! If they ban Petroleum, they will become totally spineless and become as useless as the now politically emptied storage bins of our national strategic energy reserves, no doubt also part of Putin’s 5th columnist plans for American conquest with Biden acting as the point of his spear. They were recently depleted to save Joes sinking Inflation polls, oil never to be used to protect our European allies again.
And without CO2 PLANTS can’t breath!
It has never made sense that scientists (actual scientists using scientific methods) would even consider corbon dioxide as a pollutant when it makes up only 0.04% of the atmosphere or 400 parts per million. There are many other compounds in air at greater PPM that are much more dangerous than CO2 but have never been considered, at least not by the alarmists who set their sights on the gas a long time ago. It has been reflected by some sources that if earth ever reached the goals the activists have in mind, vegitation would begin to wither and be unsustainable, breaking the food chain for animals, humans and plants, talk about extinction!
Maybe that’s because they are not True scientists, but PAID POLITICAL HACKS>
The left has carbon dioxide in the air space between their ears and this has caused the airspace between their ears to overheat, causing a permanent fog to form within their skulls.
That’s Carbon Monoxide, where half the oxygen makes it and them twice as deadly.