Patrick Moore: I was banned from speaking in Regina over this alternative CO2 point of view
There is no doubt in my mind that on
balance our CO2 emissions are 100 per cent positive for the continuation of
life on Earth
Commercial greenhouse growers around the world inject CO2 into their
greenhouses to double and triple the concentration compared to present
atmospheric levels
Article
content
Late last Friday I was
deplatformed for the first time in my 45 years of giving keynote speeches at
conferences around the world. The City of Regina, which through my speaker’s
bureau had signed a contract with me to kick off their Reimagine Regina
Conference in May, caved to local activists and told me I should stay home. In
its announcement regarding my banishment, the city said it did not want “to
spark a debate on climate change.” It said the stated goal of the conference is
“to make the city’s facilities and operations 100 per cent renewable by 2050.”
In other words, municipal officials wanted me to say what they wanted me to say
and not what I wanted to say to them. That’s just not how I operate.eires use bulletproof vest tech to protect from pothole
damage
Regina is one of at least
54 cities and towns in Canada that have declared a state of “climate
emergency.” This is political virtue-signalling at its disingenuous best: the
only people fleeing any emergency from these cities are doing so to escape the
frigid winter by flying to a warmer country further south. Not a lot of
Canadians from our southern regions are heading to Yellowknife or Inuvik,
N.W.T, to escape global warming. The climate emergency is at best a bad joke.
It might even be amusing were it not threatening to ban the primary energy
sources — natural gas, oil and coal — that provide 85 per cent of global energy
and make our civilization possible.
Of the 195 countries
recognized by the United Nations, Canada is the coldest, with an annual average
temperature of -5.35 C. (Russia is number 2 only because it doesn’t have
islands situated near the North Pole.) It strikes me as odd that the world’s
coldest country worries more about warming than the people of India, Brazil or
Saudi Arabia, where it really is warm. These countries don’t have carbon taxes
that punish farmers for fuelling their tractors or policies that are aimed at
destroying much of their country’s natural resource sector.
Why do I believe CO2 emissions from using
fossil fuels to power modern societies are not “pollution” that will bring
about the apocalypse? Let me count the ways.
First and foremost, CO2 is the most important
food for all life on earth. On both land and in the sea all the carbon for
carbon-based life, which is all life, comes from CO2. All green plants on land
and all plants in the sea, phytoplankton and kelps, combine CO2 with H2O and by
photosynthesis produce the sugars that provide the energy source for all life,
including ours. The increase in CO2 due to our emissions has resulted in a
greening of the planet and an expansion of forests. This is not contested.
Article content
Second, during the hundreds of millions of
years since modern life evolved from primitive, single-celled life in the sea,
CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans has steadily declined. This is primarily due
to the advent of calcifying marine species that use CO2 and calcium dissolved
in the sea to make protective shells of calcium carbonate (limestone) for
themselves (corals, clams, mussels, shrimp and many planktonic species, etc.). As
a result, CO2 in the atmosphere fell from at least 0.6 per cent to 0.018 per
cent only 20,000 years ago at the last glacial maximum.
Third, both cement production and our use of
fossil fuels are putting CO2 back into the atmosphere and the oceans. Both its
very long-term depletion and the return of CO2 to the atmosphere by our burning
of fossil fuels and production of cement were inadvertent. There is no credit
or blame, just pure scientific facts.
There is no doubt in my mind that on balance
our CO2 emissions are 100 per cent positive for the continuation of life on
Earth. Commercial greenhouse growers around the world inject CO2 into their
greenhouses to double and triple the concentration compared to present atmospheric
levels. By doing so they increase the growth and yield of their crops by 20 to
60 per cent. This, too, is uncontested.
I realize this is a hypothesis that not many
people have heard about, thanks to the wall of “denial” that has been created
by the climate emergency crowd. But I know that this analysis of CO2 history
will eventually win the day, as it is a provable fact. I could have presented
my ideas to the Regina audience — after all, science is about continual
discovery — but they turned me away rather than listen to an alternative point
of view.
Patrick
Moore, a past president of Greenpeace Canada, is chair of the CO2 Coalition in
Washington, D.C.
No comments:
Post a Comment