Do any of you ever read the column that appears periodically in the Traverse City Record-Eagle on the subject of oil and gas prices? It’s written by Stephen Sutherland, an area local who, he says, has been “in the oil business for most of my life,” and who labels himself “The Gas Man.” Mr. Sutherland touts himself as an expert on the production and marketing of oil in both the domestic and world markets. I have my doubts. But one thing I don’t doubt is that whatever might be his level of knowledge about oil prices, Mr. Sutherland is on the steep side of the learning curve when it comes to the environmental effects of the consumption of oil and other fossil fuels.
In his most recent column [December 5], Mr. Sutherland states that in the first 10 months of this year the demand for oil in the U.S. fell by 5.2%, the largest drop since 1981. Because of this environmentalists have lost interest in global warming. “Tell me, when was the last time you heard former Vice President Al Gore or any other politician talk about ‘Global Warming?’” he asks. “The words have been removed from nearly everyone’s vocabulary.”
To this very interesting, if implausible question, Mr. Sutherland has an equally interesting, implausible answer. Implying that environmentalists are adrift in their own alarmist theories, he suggests that their most recent ploy is to resort to putting the global warming pea under a different shell and calling it something else. “Now, it’s called climate change,” he says. (Yes, he really says this.) “Even the newest commercial on the survival of the polar bears does not mention global warming,” he continues, “it talks about climate change.” Sutherland then asks, “But when did that happen and why has it not been reported?” (Yes, he really asks this.) He concludes his commentary with the grand pronouncement that “Of course the climate is changing, as very little in this world remains constant.” Ho hum.
What Mr. Sutherland doesn’t know, of course, is that in the contemporary context global warming and climate change are much the same thing. This is to say, we’re are talking about a change not to a colder, but to a warmer climate and, to state the obvious, the earth gets warmer when its temperature and its climate get warmer. How else would you warm the earth, we might ask, other than by raising its temperature?
"Climate change," according to the Environmental Protection Agency, "refers to any distict change in measures of climate lasting for a long period of time." "In other words," the EPA continues, "'climate change' means major changes in temperature, rainfall, snow, or wind patterns lasting for decades or longer." (“Climate,” by the way, is defined as “the meteorological conditions, including temperature, precipitation, and wind, that characteristically prevail in a particular region.”) On the other hand, "global warming," says the EPA, "is an average increase in temperatures near the Earth's surface and in the lowest layer of the atmosphere. Increases in temperatures in our Earth's atmosphere can contribute to changes in global climate patterns. Global warming can be considered part of climate change along with changes in precipitation, sea level, etc."
The fact of the matter is that when it comes to the basics about global warming and climate change, Mr. Sutherland really doesn't know what he's talking about.
In In Praise of Nature, Stephanie Mills sets all of this out in just a couple of sentences: “Primarily from our burning of fossil fuels, we are adding carbon dioxide (and several other “greenhouse” gases) to the atmosphere. (For instance, an automobile driven ten thousand miles a year will produce its own weight in CO2 annually.) This increased concentration of greenhouse gases is trapping more solar warmth. The consequence of this global warming will beggar the imagination, and only radical change in our pattern of energy use can mitigate them.” Unfortunately, Mr. Sutherland seems to have no understanding of these matters, nor does he appreciate the effect that burning oil products contributes to global warming — or, for that matter, to climate change. My suggestion to Mr. Sutherland is that he very quickly get busy doing some heavy reading of the likes of Stephanie Mills and Bill McKibbon.
[For those of you who are not from this part of northern Michigan, Stephanie Mills is a highly regarded, published author who often writes about nature and environmental issues. Moreover, she’s also local, residing near Maple City here in Leelanau County.]
In his most recent column [December 5], Mr. Sutherland states that in the first 10 months of this year the demand for oil in the U.S. fell by 5.2%, the largest drop since 1981. Because of this environmentalists have lost interest in global warming. “Tell me, when was the last time you heard former Vice President Al Gore or any other politician talk about ‘Global Warming?’” he asks. “The words have been removed from nearly everyone’s vocabulary.”
To this very interesting, if implausible question, Mr. Sutherland has an equally interesting, implausible answer. Implying that environmentalists are adrift in their own alarmist theories, he suggests that their most recent ploy is to resort to putting the global warming pea under a different shell and calling it something else. “Now, it’s called climate change,” he says. (Yes, he really says this.) “Even the newest commercial on the survival of the polar bears does not mention global warming,” he continues, “it talks about climate change.” Sutherland then asks, “But when did that happen and why has it not been reported?” (Yes, he really asks this.) He concludes his commentary with the grand pronouncement that “Of course the climate is changing, as very little in this world remains constant.” Ho hum.
What Mr. Sutherland doesn’t know, of course, is that in the contemporary context global warming and climate change are much the same thing. This is to say, we’re are talking about a change not to a colder, but to a warmer climate and, to state the obvious, the earth gets warmer when its temperature and its climate get warmer. How else would you warm the earth, we might ask, other than by raising its temperature?
"Climate change," according to the Environmental Protection Agency, "refers to any distict change in measures of climate lasting for a long period of time." "In other words," the EPA continues, "'climate change' means major changes in temperature, rainfall, snow, or wind patterns lasting for decades or longer." (“Climate,” by the way, is defined as “the meteorological conditions, including temperature, precipitation, and wind, that characteristically prevail in a particular region.”) On the other hand, "global warming," says the EPA, "is an average increase in temperatures near the Earth's surface and in the lowest layer of the atmosphere. Increases in temperatures in our Earth's atmosphere can contribute to changes in global climate patterns. Global warming can be considered part of climate change along with changes in precipitation, sea level, etc."
The fact of the matter is that when it comes to the basics about global warming and climate change, Mr. Sutherland really doesn't know what he's talking about.
In In Praise of Nature, Stephanie Mills sets all of this out in just a couple of sentences: “Primarily from our burning of fossil fuels, we are adding carbon dioxide (and several other “greenhouse” gases) to the atmosphere. (For instance, an automobile driven ten thousand miles a year will produce its own weight in CO2 annually.) This increased concentration of greenhouse gases is trapping more solar warmth. The consequence of this global warming will beggar the imagination, and only radical change in our pattern of energy use can mitigate them.” Unfortunately, Mr. Sutherland seems to have no understanding of these matters, nor does he appreciate the effect that burning oil products contributes to global warming — or, for that matter, to climate change. My suggestion to Mr. Sutherland is that he very quickly get busy doing some heavy reading of the likes of Stephanie Mills and Bill McKibbon.
[For those of you who are not from this part of northern Michigan, Stephanie Mills is a highly regarded, published author who often writes about nature and environmental issues. Moreover, she’s also local, residing near Maple City here in Leelanau County.]
No comments:
Post a Comment