Environmental and vegetarian activists have been touting the virtues of a vegetarian diet as a means of helping combat climate change. They argue that raising livestock such as cattle and sheep leads to an increase in greenhouse gasses due to their belching and farting. The British government has even gone so far as to create recommended menus to eliminate high carbon foods like lamb and beef.
Now, a new study conducted by Cranfield University has concluded that switching to a vegetarian diet could actually be more harmful to the environment than a meat eating diet. You might think that the study was commissioned by the cattle and sheep farming industry, but you would be mistaken. It was actually commissioned by the environmental group the World Wildlife Fund.
The study concludes that if people switched from a meat and dairy diet to a vegetarian diet, that more farmland would be needed to supply the United Kingdom with all of their needs. This could potentially lead to further deforestation of the planet to provide that land. In addition, soy based protein substitutes often require a lot of processing and therefore more energy is expended.
I am sure that environmental groups and PETA will continue to push their far left agenda. We will continue to hear how livestock production is harming the environment. To be fair, it would probably benefit us all to occasionally have vegetarian days in our diets. As for me, I think I will have a steak, and I don't think I will feel guilty about it harming the environment.
I don't particularly care for Jon Stewart and his style of humor, however, when he is mocking Al Gore and the news of Climategate, I can bear it for a bit.
Stewart is correct that the hacked emails do not prove that global warming is false. What it does show, is that the global warming proponents are not about the scientific method, but rather pushing an agenda.
Meanwhile, Al Gore has canceled his scheduled speech at the upcoming climate change conference in Copenhagen next week due to "unforeseen" changes in his schedule. Right, Al. Climategate has nothing to do with you not attending a conference that you have made the driving force of your life since you lost to Dubya in 2000.
I heard Senator Jim Inhofe on the radio the other morning and he asserts that the cap and trade legislation is dead. That was the genesis of his "We won. You Lost. Get a Life," comments to Barbara "Call Me Senator" Boxer.
I have been an opponent of legislative efforts of restricting carbon emissions. I firmly believe that the vast majority of climate change is naturally occurring. Efforts to legislate emissions through cap and trade programs will only hurt our economy and raise costs of energy and other goods. This will negatively impact the vast majority of Americans with the poor and middle classes hurt the most.
That is not to say that I am opposed to the goal of obtaining clean energy like wind and solar power. I just think that there are better ways to achieve those goals of switching to cleaner energy. Voluntary efforts should be encouraged and rewarded. That is why I thought it was pretty cool to read a story about how the Mars corporation has unveiled an 18 acre solar garden to provide energy for their plant in Hackensack, NJ.
I think that Mars should be commended for making this investment. They should get a lot of corporate goodwill from their actions. For those folks who make this an important part of their lifestyle, they should reward companies like Mars with their business.
The one negative that I would take from the story though is that the 18 acres of solar panels only provide enough electricity to cover 20% of the plant's power needs. To me, that just seems like an awful lot of land use to provide a relatively small amount of electricity. By comparison, I found a document on the US Minerals Management Service website that stated that 1/30th of the power generated by a nuclear power plant on only 12 acres of land would power a city of 100,000 for a year. Seems like a lot more bang for the buck.
The global warming cultists continue to come up with assinine ideas for saving the planet. Here are just a few of the items that I have heard of lately.
A new book has been released called Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Livingwhich says that a medium sized pet dog has the same carbon footprint as an SUV and you would be better off owning a goldfish or canary. Try playing catch with a canary, and when was the last time a barking goldfish scared off an intruder.
California, the United Kingdom, and the European Union are looking at banning plasma televisions. Thank God I have yet to be able to afford one of those and am still using an old fashioned tube TV.
A New York Times environmental reporter has floated the idea of offering carbon credits to families that limit themselves to having one child. Tough break there for Jon & Kate Plus 8.
The state of California was also considering a ban on black cars. Suffice to say that I was going to make a smartass remark in regards to what would be the next thing to ban, but I censored myself. Use your imagination.
I have said it before and will say it again, the whole environmental movement is all about controlling your lifestyle and the choices you make.
Unemployment officially dropped to 9.4% last month from 9.5% in June. On the surface that would be a good thing, but there were actually more people unemployed. Due to the fuzzy math used in calculating the unemployment rate (I would blame the current administration, but in reality they all use this math) the rate dropped. The official calculation only counts those that are currently looking for work and collecting unemployment. It does not include those who have reached the point where they are no longer looking for work or whose unemployment benefits have run out.
If you have read here before, you may already know that I am not a fan of the cap and trade bill that passed the House in June. I believe that the majority of CO2 and climate change is naturally occurring and any attempt to regulate man made CO2 emissions will have little if any effect on climate change. Even the EPA admits that without global commitment to reducing emissions, that the Waxman Markey bill will have little impact on CO2.
The Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) recently finished an analysis of the impact on jobs and the economy from the bill. It is not good news. According to the report, between 2012-2030, the bill reduce the national GDP by $2-3 trillion. Manufacturing output would be expected to decrease 5.3-6.5% resulting in additional job losses of 1.8-2.4 million jobs. The study takes into account the potential new jobs that so called green energy could create. Let's not forget the expected increases in energy costs, 50% for electricity, 26% for gasoline, and 20% for natural gas. Higher energy costs, fewer jobs, lower GDP; not a good recipe for success.
A recent Rassmussen poll showed that 42% of Americans believe cap and trade will hurt the economy and only 19% believe it will help. In that same poll, 41% of Americans were at least somewhat against the bill, and only 37% are at least somewhat for the bill. The strongest feelings were on the "no" side with 25% strongly opposed and only12% strongly for the bill. A recent Gallup poll showed that a majority of Americans favored economic expansion over environmental concerns.
At a time when unemployment is the highest it has been in years, the last thing we need is to pass legislation that will further slow the economy and cost jobs. When the Senate returns in September, the climate change bill will be on their agenda as well as health care. So while more Americans are against cap and trade then for it, why do the Democrats insist on passing a bill that will go against the priorities of the American people? I would say that as usual, the leftist elite believe they know what is better for us than we do. So while the debate on health care reform is vitally important, let's not forget the debate on cap and trade.
Yesterday, I posted some of my feelings about the pending legislation for health care reform. It drew a rather spirited comment from the American Idiot, not on the health care debate, but rather on the climate change bill. (I will now refer to the American Idiot as Idiot, with an upper case I. This is not a derogatory salutation as idiot with a lower case i would be.)
Idiot makes the argument that the US should be the leader in developing green technologies. I could not agree more. American ingenuity and know-how should lead the way on these technologies much like they have led the way in other areas (like nuclear power but I am getting ahead of myself). Where we differ is in what to do until these new technologies are developed and on line. I prefer to take an "all of the above" approach. Let's drill for more domestic oil and natural gas, let's build new nuclear plants, and let's develop those green, renewable sources as well. Idiot on the other hand favors abandoning the old technologies in favor of the new. An admirable goal.
Idiot makes the case that in addition to developing these green technologies, we should be exporting those technologies to other countries as global demand for them increases. Excellent point and I concur.
One of the technologies that Idiot rejects that I fully support is building more nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is a green technology in that it gives off zero CO2 emissions. Idiot's argument is that it is an old technology, that can not be exported, and then there is the whole nuclear waste issue.
I came across an a Newsweek article by Andrew Bast that discusses some of the issues the US faces if they were to go back to nuclear power. While the US developed the first nuclear power reactors, we failed to keep our edge in that technology. Initially we exported the technology to other countries, now if we were to go back to building nuclear facilities, we would have to rely on the improvements in the technology developed in countries like France and Japan.
France now gets 80% of their electricity provided by nuclear power plants. They now export electricity and technology to other countries. I think Idiot would agree that if we hold the edge in a technology we should do everything to keep that edge to benefit from the exportation of that technology. On another note, how in the hell did we ever let France get better at us at anything other than producing fine wines, though the argument could be made that some of our better California vineyards produce as fine a wine as Bordeaux, but I digress.
In regards to nuclear waste, there is a lot that can be done on that front. First off, several countries engage in the recycling of nuclear waste to produce more energy. Japan in particular has made great advancements in recycling nuclear waste. Recycling, another thing that the greens of the world should be able to get behind.
There are always going to be detractors to any form of energy. Even wind turbines have their detractors, ie they could kill birds or they are an eyesore. The biggest argument against nuclear power is the "potential" for a nuclear accident. Yes that exists, but there have been very few major accidents. The potential exists that I could fall down in the shower and hurt myself, does that mean I should stop bathing? (OK that isn't on the same level as a nuclear accident, but just a cheap attempt at humor.)
Anyway, in conclusion, thank you Idiot for visiting my humble blog. I hope you will come back often. I also linked to your blog at the top of this posting.
I debated on whether or not to post something about Michael Jackson and the intense media coverage since his death. Perhaps I may make a post about that subject in the next day or two. Instead, since we are fresh off of our 4th of July celebration, I decided to post about two articles that I found on CNSNews.com regarding Fireworks.
By now, if you read here on a regular basis, you know that I think any climate change is primarily solar in nature. I am not a fan of the whole concept of the idea of cap and trade or any legislation that would increase our energy costs or impact our standard of living. I have posted about it here, here, and here.
So what did that little side rant about global warming have to do with fireworks. The first article that I came across talked about the fireworks industry coming under greater regulation if the cap and trade bill passes the Senate. Because fireworks give off CO2 when exploded, the fireworks industry could be subject to the bill. As such, the costs of our neighborhood celebrations will further stretch the already tight budgets of our local governments.
The second article, deals with the fireworks display at the National Mall. Most of the fireworks that were shot off were made in Communist China and not the USA. It just seems extremely ironic, not to mention inappropriate, that on the holiday where we celebrate our freedom as Americans that we would be using fireworks made from a totalitarian regime. I'm just saying.
Image via Wikipedia![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sCL-1o7HjsrTr1bWRo0NUNyPjJWUkHgbFITv-k-BoeqN_dcrW-90btBHBB6biK7hUxHbrA_KwGs6n55LD3U51QBbki51XiEVI-IxR4ynZsLHN-WS2mn341nSHJkVBPISDI1rX6TbRvyGrHVPdfB1gi=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tNKfHjCVUmEGqqqwzkypKBxk4mjtX3xUbJ-Y22EipNjqtDC0ZkKTJfTEI9OgNn5oJyKQo7zUQJPXpdWdVmS57TN7RVoOhMmtVkYE1ga4Mz1nh0KfkfwZdtzlFsXdVtF7C7mkzWeNIJ0GfTYdpE8Cy7=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_u8bdg1cdXcaB7Haor-h4B2pc74gQ_VtSXvx4H7ZThnKjONMUpa_Gn_0K87daGAd0Ge2GbNWM1TE1usVmMX_TnwKOWnk3JANkJSP4XdWbB2hX1fZE9xdOOJ_EoL5GlUY48PusqCfldKroPW-3rx2k7p=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v7qoGGyFZ_4lc8HXpFJ2vR2jeQvyVBbt6bYiRHhVGg-9TBFb7GdV9W43-zw9DZZZD79L4CPtI9HbVC8XJIa8IrnxwFYOXtHjCLmTEVF86GZcdOdrtfKujOFGVd_rtgU8-u-13-OW2-nxjmo5i-7z0P=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sgIsXkS4XneW-8nvFYZS2mgB4aYTNjieOwJCMT2dn1uYjdKFnUuDD7JdFjEz7qEiv4uoZdsPSdAcBTJjgin6sZxbzc7ufbtP447qLhHSJtAndA6HY81AALMNUsUXwhdQsPHsej3z5JyP3peUFXBnk=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tfL8g9G97JLB3mUDdY1OrjOHtx6dc9a5vcM4DpHSYx8YjaoVjkDq9O8t18X5bVxYcl_qVVsl_nf4JmVm9ppnMc6D8xxYe3buOag9CbrOXL-5ybu5OLbeqp3nOEs-1uOfWJHfFnU36xErOQxHIzEN8=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v6i76w1tPM6aXEUZst6Dx-jcTXhLVp2j6YMbqrW7MrMsFus-3AQCGiKSoUe5K097HoVByWNx02DaZQjdPedYwVwVfpYqZXRiUB9mFVbPwVJitVUpA8TfcFWMBZQQ2aCvD9uZgcOoJzrR48pLkds5mp=s0-d)
